FTHF vs. EMM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FTHF (First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF) and EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. FTHF is passively managed, while EMM is actively managed. Over the past year, FTHF returned 109.33% vs 63.51% for EMM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

FTHF vs. EMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FTHF achieves a 51.24% return, which is significantly higher than EMM's 32.97% return.

FTHF

• 1D: -1.84%
• 1M: 15.16%
• YTD: 51.24%
• 6M: 61.52%
• 1Y: 109.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMM

• 1D: -1.15%
• 1M: 10.12%
• YTD: 32.97%
• 6M: 38.50%
• 1Y: 63.51%
• 3Y*: 22.67%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FTHF vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	51.24%	65.30%	-8.14%	18.14%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	32.97%	30.21%	2.34%	12.11%

Correlation

The correlation between FTHF and EMM is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2023	0.85

The correlation between FTHF and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FTHF vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FTHF	EMM
Technology	40.7%	45.5%
Financial Services	27.7%	25.0%
Basic Materials	10.3%	3.9%
Energy	7.2%	4.8%
Industrials	6.2%	5.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	5.1%
Utilities	2.5%	1.2%
Communication Services	1.0%	2.7%
Consumer Cyclical	0.6%	2.7%
Healthcare	0.5%	1.5%
Real Estate	-	1.8%

Return for Risk

FTHF vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FTHF

FTHF Risk / Return Rank: 90
FTHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FTHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FTHF Omega Ratio Rank: 92
FTHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
FTHF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

FTHF vs. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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.

	FTHF	EMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.36	2.94	+0.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	3.79	+0.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.52	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.74	4.33	+2.42
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	18.95	18.13	+0.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FTHF vs. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTHF Sharpe Ratio is 3.36, which is comparable to the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTHF and EMM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FTHF	EMM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.36	2.94	+0.41
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.86	1.17	+0.69

Drawdowns

FTHF vs. EMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTHF drawdown since its inception was -17.36%, smaller than the maximum EMM drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTHF and EMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTHF	EMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.36%	-21.99%	+4.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.31%	-14.75%	-1.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.84%	-1.15%	-0.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.22%	-4.68%	+0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.79%	3.51%	+2.28%

Volatility

FTHF vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) has a higher volatility of 12.15% compared to Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) at 9.79%. This indicates that FTHF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FTHF	EMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.15%	9.79%	+2.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.47%	19.28%	+5.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.76%	21.69%	+11.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.45%	18.83%	+6.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.45%	18.83%	+6.62%

FTHF vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FTHF and EMM have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

FTHF vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison

FTHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.98%, more than EMM's 0.67% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.67%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	2.98%	4.40%	3.34%	0.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTHF and EMM in my portfolio?

FTHF and EMM have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FTHF or EMM?

FTHF has higher volatility (12.15%) compared to EMM (9.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTHF dropped -17.36% vs EMM's -21.99%.

Which ETF is better, FTHF or EMM?

On 1-year performance, FTHF leads with 109.33% vs 63.51% for EMM. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, EMM has been the lower-risk option at 9.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FTHF or EMM?

Over the 1-year period, FTHF has performed better with a 109.33% return vs 63.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FTHF or EMM?

FTHF and EMM have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FTHF or EMM?

FTHF has the higher dividend yield at 2.98%, compared with 0.67% for EMM.

What is the main difference between FTHF and EMM?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Global X.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTHF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs 2.94), 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.