IEMG vs. LSGR

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) and LSGR (Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IEMG is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net), while LSGR is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Natixis. IEMG is passively managed, while LSGR is actively managed. Over the past year, IEMG returned 44.83% vs 7.07% for LSGR. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IEMG charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for LSGR.

Performance

IEMG vs. LSGR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) and Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEMG achieves a 22.84% return, which is significantly higher than LSGR's -4.33% return.

IEMG

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 22.84%
• 6M: 25.59%
• 1Y: 44.83%
• 3Y*: 21.33%
• 5Y*: 7.15%
• 10Y*: 10.42%

LSGR

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: -7.20%
• YTD: -4.33%
• 6M: -2.44%
• 1Y: 7.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IEMG vs. LSGR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	22.84%	32.56%	6.50%	5.06%
LSGR Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF	-4.33%	15.32%	38.52%	12.46%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMG and LSGR is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 29, 2023	0.58

The correlation between IEMG and LSGR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

IEMG vs. LSGR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IEMG	LSGR
Technology	42.1%	33.3%
Financial Services	16.7%	6.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.5%	16.2%
Industrials	8.0%	3.8%
Basic Materials	6.3%	-
Communication Services	5.6%	24.9%
Energy	3.3%	-
Healthcare	3.2%	11.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	3.4%
Utilities	1.9%	-
Real Estate	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

IEMG vs. LSGR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEMG

IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 73
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 76
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 73

LSGR

LSGR Risk / Return Rank: 15
LSGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
LSGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
LSGR Omega Ratio Rank: 15
LSGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
LSGR Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

IEMG vs. LSGR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) and Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR). 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.

	IEMG	LSGR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.03	0.38	+1.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	0.62	+2.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.08	+0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.23	0.35	+2.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.89	1.09	+10.80

IEMG vs. LSGR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMG Sharpe Ratio is 2.03, which is higher than the LSGR Sharpe Ratio of 0.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMG and LSGR, 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

IEMG vs. LSGR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMG drawdown since its inception was -38.71%, which is greater than LSGR's maximum drawdown of -22.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMG and LSGR.

Drawdown Indicators

	IEMG	LSGR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.71%	-22.92%	-15.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.21%	-18.13%	+4.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.21%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.98%	-7.36%	+3.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.95%	-3.91%	-9.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.59%	5.76%	-2.17%

Volatility

IEMG vs. LSGR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a higher volatility of 10.60% compared to Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF (LSGR) at 5.34%. This indicates that IEMG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LSGR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IEMG	LSGR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.60%	5.34%	+5.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.89%	12.90%	+5.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.08%	16.73%	+4.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.73%	20.41%	-1.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.17%	20.41%	-0.24%

IEMG vs. LSGR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMG has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than LSGR's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

IEMG vs. LSGR - Dividend Comparison

IEMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, while LSGR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	2.24%	2.75%	3.20%	2.89%	2.71%	3.06%	1.87%	3.15%	2.76%	2.35%	2.28%	2.53%
LSGR Natixis Loomis Sayles Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.05%	0.08%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IEMG and LSGR in my portfolio?

IEMG and LSGR have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IEMG or LSGR?

IEMG has higher volatility (10.60%) compared to LSGR (5.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEMG dropped -38.71% vs LSGR's -22.92%.

Which ETF is better, IEMG or LSGR?

On 1-year performance, IEMG leads with 44.83% vs 7.07% for LSGR. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, LSGR has been the lower-risk option at 5.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IEMG or LSGR?

Over the 1-year period, IEMG has performed better with a 44.83% return vs 7.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IEMG or LSGR?

IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for LSGR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IEMG or LSGR?

IEMG has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 0.00% for LSGR.

What is the main difference between IEMG and LSGR?

IEMG is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while LSGR is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Natixis. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IEMG and 0.59% for LSGR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IEMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.38), 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.