FFEM vs. DFEM

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

FFEM (Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF) and DFEM (Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FFEM returned 46.94% vs 29.34% for DFEM. Their correlation of 0.95 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FFEM charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for DFEM.

Performance

FFEM vs. DFEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFEM achieves a 23.20% return, which is significantly higher than DFEM's 14.75% return.

FFEM

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: -2.11%
• 6M: 12.60%
• YTD: 23.20%
• 1Y: 46.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 29.60%

DFEM

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: -4.27%
• 6M: 6.72%
• YTD: 14.75%
• 1Y: 29.34%
• 3Y*: 17.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.40%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	$43.02M	$39.58M	$39.86M
FFEM Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF	$1.53M	$1.01M	$840.57K

FFEM vs. DFEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FFEM Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF	23.20%	40.03%	-10.18%
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	14.75%	29.51%	-0.93%

Correlation

The correlation between FFEM and DFEM is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2024	0.95

The correlation between FFEM and DFEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FFEM vs. DFEM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FFEM

FFEM Risk / Return Rank: 78
FFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 77
FFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 79

DFEM

DFEM Risk / Return Rank: 55
DFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
DFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
DFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 57
DFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
DFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 58

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FFEM vs. DFEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) and Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FFEM	DFEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	1.28	+0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.32	1.76	+0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.25	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	2.08	+1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.99	6.85	+3.15

FFEM vs. DFEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is higher than the DFEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFEM and DFEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FFEM vs. DFEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFEM drawdown since its inception was -18.17%, smaller than the maximum DFEM drawdown of -20.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFEM and DFEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFEM	DFEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.17%	-20.82%	+2.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.53%	-13.84%	-0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.09%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.95%	-10.46%	+0.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.90%	-5.08%	+1.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.60%	4.19%	+0.41%

Volatility

FFEM vs. DFEM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF (FFEM) has a higher volatility of 9.93% compared to Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF (DFEM) at 8.15%. This indicates that FFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFEM	DFEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.93%	8.15%	+1.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.77%	20.62%	+3.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.25%	22.46%	+3.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.05%	18.17%	+6.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.05%	18.17%	+6.88%

FFEM vs. DFEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFEM has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than DFEM's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFEM vs. DFEM - Dividend Comparison

FFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.33%, less than DFEM's 1.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
DFEM Dimensional Emerging Markets Core Equity 2 ETF	1.97%	2.32%	2.50%	2.38%	1.99%
FFEM Fidelity Fundamental Emerging Markets ETF	1.33%	1.59%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFEM and DFEM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, FFEM and DFEM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FFEM or DFEM?

FFEM has higher volatility (9.93%) compared to DFEM (8.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFEM dropped -18.17% vs DFEM's -20.82%.

Which ETF is better, FFEM or DFEM?

On 1-year performance, FFEM leads with 46.94% vs 29.34% for DFEM. On fees, DFEM is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, DFEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFEM or DFEM?

Over the 1-year period, FFEM has performed better with a 46.94% return vs 29.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFEM or DFEM?

DFEM is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FFEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFEM or DFEM?

DFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.97%, compared with 1.33% for FFEM.

What is the main difference between FFEM and DFEM?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FFEM and 0.39% for DFEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.28), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.