IEMFX vs. FCEEX

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

IEMFX (T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund) and FCEEX (Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 5 years, IEMFX returned 2.32%/yr vs 9.34%/yr for FCEEX. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IEMFX charges 1.06%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for FCEEX.

Performance

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) and Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor (FCEEX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEMFX achieves a 25.93% return, which is significantly higher than FCEEX's 23.70% return.

IEMFX

• 1D: -5.70%
• 1M: 3.18%
• YTD: 25.93%
• 6M: 27.51%
• 1Y: 51.60%
• 3Y*: 17.75%
• 5Y*: 2.32%
• 10Y*: 8.16%

FCEEX

• 1D: -5.20%
• 1M: 1.63%
• YTD: 23.70%
• 6M: 24.74%
• 1Y: 43.40%
• 3Y*: 25.24%
• 5Y*: 9.34%
• 10Y*: —

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

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
IEMFX T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund	25.93%	32.91%	-1.60%	2.26%	-23.34%	-10.61%	17.81%	11.68%
FCEEX Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor	23.70%	34.81%	10.51%	12.52%	-16.96%	-1.29%	10.19%	9.77%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMFX and FCEEX is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2019	0.94

The correlation between IEMFX and FCEEX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IEMFX vs. FCEEX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEMFX

IEMFX Risk / Return Rank: 84
IEMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
IEMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
IEMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 83
IEMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
IEMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

FCEEX

FCEEX Risk / Return Rank: 75
FCEEX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
FCEEX Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FCEEX Omega Ratio Rank: 75
FCEEX Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
FCEEX Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) and Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor (FCEEX). 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.

	IEMFX	FCEEX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.31	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	2.87	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.44	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.15	3.66	+0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.91	13.77	+2.14

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the FCEEX Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMFX and FCEEX, 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

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMFX drawdown since its inception was -71.65%, which is greater than FCEEX's maximum drawdown of -34.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMFX and FCEEX.

Drawdown Indicators

	IEMFX	FCEEX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.65%	-34.68%	-36.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.49%	-12.98%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.34%	-15.47%	-0.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.79%	-33.39%	-9.40%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.70%	-5.42%	-0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.72%	-11.19%	-8.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.52%	3.44%	+0.08%

Volatility

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Volatility Comparison

T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) has a higher volatility of 13.27% compared to Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor (FCEEX) at 11.80%. This indicates that IEMFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCEEX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IEMFX	FCEEX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.27%	11.80%	+1.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.24%	18.41%	+1.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.27%	20.60%	+1.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.67%	17.57%	+1.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.89%	18.74%	+0.15%

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMFX has a 1.06% expense ratio, which is higher than FCEEX's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

IEMFX vs. FCEEX - Dividend Comparison

IEMFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%, less than FCEEX's 2.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCEEX Franklin Emerging Market Core Equity (IU) Fund Advisor	2.38%	3.29%	4.17%	4.36%	4.08%	3.38%	2.98%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IEMFX T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund	1.93%	2.43%	0.92%	1.88%	3.87%	3.07%	0.56%	1.43%	1.15%	0.54%	0.83%	0.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IEMFX and FCEEX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, IEMFX and FCEEX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IEMFX or FCEEX?

IEMFX has higher volatility (13.27%) compared to FCEEX (11.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEMFX dropped -71.65% vs FCEEX's -34.68%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IEMFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.31), 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.