FLOT vs. RWEM
FLOT (iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF) and RWEM (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLOT is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index, while RWEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FLOT returned 5.60%/yr vs 24.58%/yr for RWEM. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLOT charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for RWEM.
Performance
FLOT vs. RWEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLOT achieves a 2.03% return, which is significantly lower than RWEM's 27.68% return.
FLOT
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- 2.03%
- 6M
- 2.19%
- 1Y
- 4.78%
- 3Y*
- 5.60%
- 5Y*
- 4.22%
- 10Y*
- 3.04%
RWEM
- 1D
- -1.40%
- 1M
- 6.68%
- YTD
- 27.68%
- 6M
- 30.93%
- 1Y
- 52.26%
- 3Y*
- 24.58%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLOT vs. RWEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 2.03% | 4.91% | 6.53% | 6.43% | 1.28% | 0.19% |
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 27.68% | 28.17% | 7.24% | 21.56% | -20.11% | 0.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLOT and RWEM is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2021 | 0.20 |
The correlation between FLOT and RWEM shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (1 year) to 0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
FLOT vs. RWEM — Risk / Return Rank
FLOT
RWEM
FLOT vs. RWEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT) and Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM). 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.
| FLOT | RWEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +4.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +9.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 3.15 | 1.30 | +1.85 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 11.13 | 3.41 | +7.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 103.02 | 10.75 | +92.27 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLOT vs. RWEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLOT drawdown since its inception was -13.54%, smaller than the maximum RWEM drawdown of -26.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLOT and RWEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLOT | RWEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.54% | -26.92% | +13.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.43% | -15.39% | +14.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.57% | -22.56% | +20.99% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -2.36% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -13.54% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.40% | +1.40% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.21% | -9.57% | +9.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.05% | 4.87% | -4.82% |
Volatility
FLOT vs. RWEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF (FLOT) is 0.21%, while Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) has a volatility of 15.58%. This indicates that FLOT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RWEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLOT | RWEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.21% | 15.58% | -15.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.63% | 29.40% | -28.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.75% | 34.92% | -34.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.78% | 22.29% | -20.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.15% | 22.29% | -18.14% |
FLOT vs. RWEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLOT has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than RWEM's 0.52% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLOT vs. RWEM - Dividend Comparison
FLOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.53%, more than RWEM's 1.69% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLOT iShares Floating Rate Bond ETF | 4.53% | 4.84% | 5.82% | 5.66% | 2.06% | 0.43% | 1.25% | 2.78% | 2.41% | 1.46% | 0.97% | 0.53% |
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.69% | 2.15% | 3.59% | 1.60% | 5.59% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLOT and RWEM have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RWEM has higher volatility (15.58%) compared to FLOT (0.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLOT dropped -13.54% vs RWEM's -26.92%.
On 3-year performance, RWEM leads with 24.58% vs 5.60% for FLOT. On fees, FLOT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLOT has been the lower-risk option at 0.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, RWEM has performed better with a 24.58% return vs 5.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLOT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RWEM.
FLOT has the higher dividend yield at 4.53%, compared with 1.69% for RWEM.
FLOT is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while RWEM is Emerging Markets Equities. FLOT tracks Bloomberg US Floating Rate Note < 5 Years Index, while RWEM tracks FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Rayliant. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLOT and 0.52% for RWEM.
FLOT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.42 vs 1.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLOT and RWEM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer