HLMEX vs. CEMFX
Compare and contrast key facts about Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio (HLMEX) and Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund (CEMFX).
HLMEX is managed by Harding Loevner. It was launched on Oct 16, 2005. CEMFX is managed by Cullen Funds Trust. It was launched on Aug 30, 2012.
Performance
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HLMEX Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio | -0.65% | -34.86% | 2.71% | 6.16% | -27.66% | -3.41% | 13.88% | 25.78% | -18.62% | 35.33% |
CEMFX Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund | 7.09% | 31.39% | 9.51% | 26.45% | -16.15% | 6.74% | 8.70% | 19.75% | -16.90% | 29.82% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HLMEX achieves a -0.65% return, which is significantly lower than CEMFX's 7.09% return. Over the past 10 years, HLMEX has underperformed CEMFX with an annualized return of -1.84%, while CEMFX has yielded a comparatively higher 9.60% annualized return.
HLMEX
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -10.06%
- YTD
- -0.65%
- 6M
- -48.09%
- 1Y
- -36.62%
- 3Y*
- -11.93%
- 5Y*
- -13.48%
- 10Y*
- -1.84%
CEMFX
- 1D
- 0.29%
- 1M
- -10.12%
- YTD
- 7.09%
- 6M
- 11.76%
- 1Y
- 38.29%
- 3Y*
- 21.61%
- 5Y*
- 10.53%
- 10Y*
- 9.60%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Expense Ratio Comparison
HLMEX has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than CEMFX's 1.00% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
HLMEX vs. CEMFX — Risk / Return Rank
HLMEX
CEMFX
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio (HLMEX) and Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund (CEMFX). 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.
| HLMEX | CEMFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.71 | 2.37 | -3.09 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.51 | 2.99 | -3.51 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.79 | 1.45 | -0.67 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.74 | 2.99 | -3.73 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.51 | 11.06 | -12.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HLMEX | CEMFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.71 | 2.37 | -3.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.49 | 0.75 | -1.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.08 | 0.65 | -0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.08 | 0.46 | -0.38 |
Correlation
The correlation between HLMEX and CEMFX is 0.83, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Dividend Comparison
HLMEX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEMFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.03%.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HLMEX Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio | 0.00% | 0.00% | 14.22% | 1.40% | 0.96% | 0.71% | 0.39% | 1.46% | 0.98% | 0.76% | 0.62% | 0.63% |
CEMFX Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund | 2.03% | 1.72% | 3.31% | 4.68% | 1.26% | 2.62% | 2.13% | 4.16% | 2.26% | 3.59% | 3.65% | 4.60% |
Drawdowns
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HLMEX drawdown since its inception was -65.03%, which is greater than CEMFX's maximum drawdown of -39.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HLMEX and CEMFX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| HLMEX | CEMFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -65.03% | -39.30% | -25.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -50.96% | -12.41% | -38.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -55.58% | -28.13% | -27.45% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -56.41% | -39.30% | -17.11% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -55.29% | -12.16% | -43.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.94% | -9.69% | -8.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 25.11% | 3.35% | +21.76% |
Volatility
HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Volatility Comparison
Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio (HLMEX) and Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund (CEMFX) have volatilities of 6.95% and 6.93%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| HLMEX | CEMFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.95% | 6.93% | +0.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 69.03% | 12.36% | +56.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 51.99% | 16.39% | +35.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.49% | 14.09% | +13.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.71% | 14.92% | +8.79% |