GREK vs. EMSF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

GREK (Global X MSCI Greece ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. GREK is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, GREK returned 36.74% vs 42.52% for EMSF. Their 0.52 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GREK charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

GREK vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MSCI Greece ETF (GREK) 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, GREK achieves a 22.60% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 30.73% return.

GREK

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 5.48%
• 6M: 9.57%
• YTD: 22.60%
• 1Y: 36.74%
• 3Y*: 32.40%
• 5Y*: 27.82%
• 10Y*: 17.36%
• ALL TIME*: 6.26%

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
GREK Global X MSCI Greece ETF	$9.46M	$9.35M	$7.83M

GREK vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GREK Global X MSCI Greece ETF	22.60%	76.11%	9.53%	13.35%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	30.73%	19.20%	-3.09%	0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between GREK and EMSF is 0.55, 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.	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.52

The correlation between GREK and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

GREK vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GREK	EMSF
Financial Services	48.8%	15.0%
Utilities	14.3%	2.1%
Industrials	12.5%	11.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	6.3%
Energy	6.8%	-
Communication Services	4.1%	1.7%
Basic Materials	3.0%	-
Real Estate	1.0%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	3.6%
Healthcare	-	6.0%
Technology	-	52.8%

Return for Risk

GREK vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

GREK

GREK Risk / Return Rank: 58
GREK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
GREK Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
GREK Omega Ratio Rank: 62
GREK Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
GREK Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

GREK vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI Greece ETF (GREK) 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.

	GREK	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	1.36	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	1.86	+0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.25	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	2.10	-0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.27	7.05	-1.79

GREK vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GREK Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GREK 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

GREK vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GREK drawdown since its inception was -79.50%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GREK and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GREK	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.50%	-24.75%	-54.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.32%	-19.49%	-1.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.32%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.46%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.62%	-15.62%	+15.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.86%	-5.91%	-38.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.92%	5.80%	+1.12%

Volatility

GREK vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X MSCI Greece ETF (GREK) is 7.63%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 10.79%. This indicates that GREK 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

	GREK	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.63%	10.79%	-3.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.24%	26.54%	-5.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.67%	30.10%	-5.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.49%	24.40%	+0.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.85%	24.40%	+4.45%

GREK vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GREK has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

GREK vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

GREK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.43%, more than EMSF's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.44%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GREK Global X MSCI Greece ETF	2.43%	3.46%	4.63%	2.61%	2.82%	2.16%	2.62%	2.25%	2.41%	2.13%	1.95%	1.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GREK and EMSF in my portfolio?

GREK and EMSF have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GREK or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to GREK (7.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GREK dropped -79.50% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, GREK or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs 36.74% for GREK. On fees, GREK is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, GREK has been the lower-risk option at 7.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GREK or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs 36.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GREK or EMSF?

GREK is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

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

GREK has the higher dividend yield at 2.43%, compared with 1.44% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between GREK and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for GREK and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GREK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 1.36), 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.