MADCX vs. LZEMX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MADCX (BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc.) and LZEMX (Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 10 years, MADCX returned 11.46%/yr vs 11.13%/yr for LZEMX. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MADCX charges 0.86%/yr vs 1.06%/yr for LZEMX.

Performance

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc. (MADCX) and Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio (LZEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MADCX achieves a 34.34% return, which is significantly higher than LZEMX's 26.96% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with MADCX having a 11.46% annualized return and LZEMX not far behind at 11.13%.

MADCX

• 1D: 1.10%
• 1M: 10.17%
• YTD: 34.34%
• 6M: 38.51%
• 1Y: 65.24%
• 3Y*: 21.90%
• 5Y*: 5.54%
• 10Y*: 11.46%

LZEMX

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 7.95%
• YTD: 26.96%
• 6M: 29.16%
• 1Y: 57.41%
• 3Y*: 29.23%
• 5Y*: 13.38%
• 10Y*: 11.13%

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

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MADCX BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc.	34.34%	30.47%	-1.09%	10.77%	-24.12%	-1.14%	24.53%	26.47%	-10.73%	42.09%
LZEMX Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio	26.96%	41.35%	7.60%	22.44%	-14.86%	5.37%	-0.07%	18.06%	-18.11%	28.02%

Correlation

The correlation between MADCX and LZEMX is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 1994	0.89

The correlation between MADCX and LZEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MADCX vs. LZEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MADCX

MADCX Risk / Return Rank: 87
MADCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
MADCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
MADCX Omega Ratio Rank: 85
MADCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
MADCX Martin Ratio Rank: 88

LZEMX

LZEMX Risk / Return Rank: 96
LZEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
LZEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
LZEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
LZEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
LZEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc. (MADCX) and Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio (LZEMX). 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.

	MADCX	LZEMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	4.35	-1.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	5.54	-1.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.81	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.20	5.58	-1.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.95	20.53	-3.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MADCX Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is comparable to the LZEMX Sharpe Ratio of 4.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MADCX and LZEMX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MADCX	LZEMX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	4.35	-1.21
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	0.94	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.62	0.68	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.41	-0.03

Drawdowns

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MADCX drawdown since its inception was -66.58%, which is greater than LZEMX's maximum drawdown of -60.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MADCX and LZEMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MADCX	LZEMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.58%	-60.08%	-6.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.57%	-10.42%	-5.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.25%	-14.27%	-5.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.70%	-30.55%	-10.15%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.82%	-44.08%	+0.26%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.37%	-16.63%	-1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.85%	2.83%	+1.02%

Volatility

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Volatility Comparison

BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc. (MADCX) has a higher volatility of 8.77% compared to Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio (LZEMX) at 5.21%. This indicates that MADCX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LZEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MADCX	LZEMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.77%	5.21%	+3.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.16%	10.95%	+7.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.79%	13.37%	+7.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.16%	14.32%	+3.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.57%	16.39%	+2.18%

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MADCX has a 0.86% expense ratio, which is lower than LZEMX's 1.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

MADCX vs. LZEMX - Dividend Comparison

MADCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, more than LZEMX's 1.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LZEMX Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio	1.61%	2.05%	3.11%	3.76%	5.92%	4.89%	2.11%	2.45%	2.10%	1.99%	1.48%	2.14%
MADCX BlackRock Emerging Markets Fund, Inc.	3.17%	4.26%	1.90%	1.67%	2.22%	5.72%	0.97%	1.53%	0.98%	0.48%	1.82%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MADCX and LZEMX in my portfolio?

MADCX and LZEMX have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MADCX or LZEMX?

MADCX has higher volatility (8.77%) compared to LZEMX (5.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MADCX dropped -66.58% vs LZEMX's -60.08%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LZEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.35 vs 3.14), 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.