FMQQ vs. EMSF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FMQQ (FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. FMQQ is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, FMQQ returned -10.97% vs 42.52% for EMSF. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FMQQ charges 0.86%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF (FMQQ) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMQQ achieves a -9.49% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 30.73% return.

FMQQ

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 3.35%
• 6M: -5.83%
• YTD: -9.49%
• 1Y: -10.97%
• 3Y*: 2.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -13.42%

EMSF

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -8.36%
• 6M: 17.49%
• YTD: 30.73%
• 1Y: 42.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.92%

*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)
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	$80.02K	$93.23K	$184.42K
FMQQ FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF	$165.12K	$155.48K	$92.62K

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FMQQ FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF	-9.49%	10.77%	12.45%	8.93%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	30.73%	19.20%	-3.09%	0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between FMQQ and EMSF is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.64

The correlation between FMQQ and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMQQ	EMSF
Consumer Cyclical	32.7%	6.3%
Technology	6.6%	52.8%
Communication Services	6.4%	1.7%
Industrials	3.7%	11.0%
Financial Services	2.3%	15.0%
Utilities	1.5%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	3.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	6.0%

Return for Risk

FMQQ vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMQQ

FMQQ Risk / Return Rank: 5
FMQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
FMQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
FMQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 4
FMQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FMQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 7

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 57
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF (FMQQ) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	FMQQ	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.60	1.36	-1.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.75	1.86	-2.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.25	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.38	2.10	-2.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.65	7.05	-7.70

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMQQ Sharpe Ratio is -0.60, which is lower than the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMQQ and EMSF, 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

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMQQ drawdown since its inception was -64.51%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMQQ and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMQQ	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.51%	-24.75%	-39.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.82%	-19.49%	-11.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.82%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-51.07%	-15.62%	-35.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-49.49%	-5.91%	-43.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.93%	5.80%	+12.13%

Volatility

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF (FMQQ) is 4.57%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 10.79%. This indicates that FMQQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMQQ	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	10.79%	-6.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.49%	26.54%	-10.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.46%	30.10%	-10.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.65%	24.40%	+0.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.65%	24.40%	+0.25%

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMQQ has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is higher than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMQQ vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

FMQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%, less than EMSF's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.44%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
FMQQ FMQQ The Next Frontier Internet & Ecommerce ETF	0.68%	0.61%	0.45%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMQQ and EMSF in my portfolio?

FMQQ and EMSF have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMQQ or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to FMQQ (4.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMQQ dropped -64.51% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, FMQQ or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs -10.97% for FMQQ. On fees, EMSF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, FMQQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMQQ or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs -10.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMQQ or EMSF?

EMSF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for FMQQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMQQ or EMSF?

EMSF has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.68% for FMQQ.

What is the main difference between FMQQ and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: EMQQ Global and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.86% for FMQQ and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs -0.60), 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.