HLMEX vs. CEMFX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

HLMEX (Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio) and CEMFX (Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, HLMEX returned 5.74%/yr vs 9.68%/yr for CEMFX. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. HLMEX charges 1.10%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for CEMFX.

Performance

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio (HLMEX) and Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund (CEMFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HLMEX having a 15.46% return and CEMFX slightly higher at 15.68%. Over the past 10 years, HLMEX has underperformed CEMFX with an annualized return of 5.74%, while CEMFX has yielded a comparatively higher 9.68% annualized return.

HLMEX

• 1D: 3.49%
• 1M: -0.64%
• 6M: 6.95%
• YTD: 15.46%
• 1Y: 33.34%
• 3Y*: 13.66%
• 5Y*: 2.20%
• 10Y*: 5.74%
• ALL TIME*: 6.12%

CEMFX

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: -3.78%
• 6M: 3.17%
• YTD: 15.68%
• 1Y: 34.36%
• 3Y*: 20.20%
• 5Y*: 12.01%
• 10Y*: 9.68%
• ALL TIME*: 7.01%

*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)
CEMFX Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
HLMEX Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
HLMEX Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio	15.46%	28.02%	2.71%	6.16%	-27.66%	-3.41%	13.88%	25.78%	-18.62%	35.33%
CEMFX Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund	15.68%	31.39%	9.51%	26.45%	-16.15%	6.74%	8.70%	19.75%	-16.90%	29.82%

Correlation

The correlation between HLMEX and CEMFX is 0.73, 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.	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.77
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2013	0.83

The correlation between HLMEX and CEMFX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HLMEX vs. CEMFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

HLMEX

HLMEX Risk / Return Rank: 72
HLMEX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
HLMEX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
HLMEX Omega Ratio Rank: 73
HLMEX Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
HLMEX Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CEMFX

CEMFX Risk / Return Rank: 71
CEMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
CEMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 73
CEMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
CEMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

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.

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.

	HLMEX	CEMFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.78	1.76	+0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.41	2.37	+0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.32	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	2.58	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.72	7.39	+1.32

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HLMEX Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the CEMFX Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HLMEX and CEMFX, 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	HLMEX	CEMFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.03%	-39.30%	-25.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-12.41%	+0.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.59%	-13.27%	-5.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.43%	-26.73%	-13.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.82%	-39.30%	-4.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.39%	-10.31%	+4.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.07%	-9.56%	-7.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.55%	4.32%	-0.77%

Volatility

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Volatility Comparison

Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio (HLMEX) has a higher volatility of 6.93% compared to Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund (CEMFX) at 6.25%. This indicates that HLMEX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEMFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HLMEX	CEMFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.93%	6.25%	+0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.57%	15.59%	-0.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.45%	18.16%	-0.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.01%	14.95%	+2.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.01%	15.27%	+2.74%

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

HLMEX has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than CEMFX's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

HLMEX vs. CEMFX - Dividend Comparison

HLMEX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 82.72%, more than CEMFX's 2.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEMFX Cullen Emerging Markets High Dividend Fund	2.17%	1.72%	3.31%	4.68%	1.26%	2.62%	2.13%	4.16%	2.26%	3.59%	3.65%	4.60%
HLMEX Harding Loevner Institutional Emerging Markets Portfolio	82.72%	95.51%	14.22%	1.40%	0.96%	0.71%	0.39%	1.46%	0.98%	0.76%	0.62%	0.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HLMEX and CEMFX in my portfolio?

HLMEX and CEMFX have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HLMEX or CEMFX?

HLMEX has higher volatility (6.93%) compared to CEMFX (6.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HLMEX dropped -65.03% vs CEMFX's -39.30%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HLMEX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.76), 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.