MEM vs. EEMS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MEM (Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF) and EEMS (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. MEM is actively managed, while EEMS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MEM returned 23.26%/yr vs 16.81%/yr for EEMS. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MEM charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.73%/yr for EEMS.

Performance

MEM vs. EEMS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEM achieves a 28.39% return, which is significantly higher than EEMS's 14.63% return.

MEM

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: 8.03%
• YTD: 28.39%
• 6M: 30.14%
• 1Y: 54.36%
• 3Y*: 23.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EEMS

• 1D: -1.36%
• 1M: 1.46%
• YTD: 14.63%
• 6M: 16.52%
• 1Y: 29.38%
• 3Y*: 16.81%
• 5Y*: 6.92%
• 10Y*: 9.29%

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

MEM vs. EEMS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MEM Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF	28.39%	28.31%	10.11%	6.92%	7.30%
EEMS iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF	14.63%	19.78%	3.13%	23.09%	4.58%

Correlation

The correlation between MEM and EEMS is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2022	0.83

The correlation between MEM and EEMS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEM vs. EEMS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEM	EEMS
Technology	37.5%	22.7%
Financial Services	24.6%	11.1%
Basic Materials	9.2%	9.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	9.6%
Industrials	8.9%	18.9%
Communication Services	5.6%	2.9%
Energy	2.9%	2.4%
Real Estate	1.6%	5.9%
Consumer Defensive	1.4%	5.2%
Healthcare	0.8%	9.4%
Utilities	-	2.7%

Return for Risk

MEM vs. EEMS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEM

MEM Risk / Return Rank: 77
MEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
MEM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
MEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MEM Martin Ratio Rank: 73

EEMS

EEMS Risk / Return Rank: 51
EEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
EEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
EEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 49
EEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
EEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

MEM vs. EEMS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS). 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.

	MEM	EEMS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	1.71	+0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.47	2.31	+1.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.31	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.74	2.72	+1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.64	9.56	+4.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MEM vs. EEMS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the EEMS Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEM and EEMS, 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

	MEM	EEMS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65	1.71	+0.94
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.52	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.14	0.32	+0.82

Drawdowns

MEM vs. EEMS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEM drawdown since its inception was -19.10%, smaller than the maximum EEMS drawdown of -48.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEM and EEMS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEM	EEMS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.10%	-48.89%	+29.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.62%	-10.87%	-3.75%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.10%	-19.71%	+0.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.07%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-48.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.34%	-2.41%	+1.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.74%	-10.50%	+5.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.00%	3.08%	+0.92%

Volatility

MEM vs. EEMS - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) has a higher volatility of 8.97% compared to iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF (EEMS) at 7.07%. This indicates that MEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EEMS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEM	EEMS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.97%	7.07%	+1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.95%	14.90%	+3.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.65%	17.30%	+3.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.31%	16.06%	+2.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.31%	17.99%	+0.32%

MEM vs. EEMS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEM has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than EEMS's 0.73% expense ratio.

Dividends

MEM vs. EEMS - Dividend Comparison

MEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.77%, more than EEMS's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMS iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small-Cap ETF	2.69%	3.09%	2.60%	2.69%	0.89%	3.56%	2.14%	2.64%	3.06%	2.47%	2.51%	2.33%
MEM Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF	2.77%	3.56%	7.81%	0.01%	0.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEM and EEMS in my portfolio?

MEM and EEMS have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MEM or EEMS?

MEM has higher volatility (8.97%) compared to EEMS (7.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEM dropped -19.10% vs EEMS's -48.89%.

Which ETF is better, MEM or EEMS?

On 3-year performance, MEM leads with 23.26% vs 16.81% for EEMS. On fees, EEMS is cheaper at 0.73% per year. On volatility, EEMS has been the lower-risk option at 7.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MEM or EEMS?

Over the 3-year period, MEM has performed better with a 23.26% return vs 16.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEM or EEMS?

EEMS is cheaper with a 0.73% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MEM or EEMS?

MEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.77%, compared with 2.69% for EEMS.

What is the main difference between MEM and EEMS?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MEM and 0.73% for EEMS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 1.71), 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.