PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MEM vs. PEMX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MEM vs. PEMX - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEM achieves a 24.68% return, which is significantly lower than PEMX's 38.87% return.


MEM

1D
-5.79%
1M
2.54%
YTD
24.68%
6M
25.39%
1Y
46.10%
3Y*
21.88%
5Y*
10Y*

PEMX

1D
-6.08%
1M
6.67%
YTD
38.87%
6M
41.13%
1Y
69.16%
3Y*
33.94%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MEM vs. PEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MEM
Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF
24.68%28.31%10.11%4.59%
PEMX
Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF
38.87%34.01%17.21%15.13%

Correlation

The correlation between MEM and PEMX is 0.90, 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

0.90

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2023

0.84

The correlation between MEM and PEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

MEM vs. PEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEM
MEM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
MEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
MEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
MEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
MEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank

PEMX
PEMX Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
PEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
PEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
PEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
PEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
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. PEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) and Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX). 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.


MEMPEMXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.36

1.49

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.17

4.81

-1.64

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.12

18.22

-7.10

MEM vs. PEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the PEMX Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEM and PEMX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MEM vs. PEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEM drawdown since its inception was -19.10%, which is greater than PEMX's maximum drawdown of -14.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEM and PEMX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MEMPEMXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.10%

-14.91%

-4.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.62%

-14.45%

-0.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.10%

-14.91%

-4.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.79%

-6.08%

+0.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.73%

-2.85%

-1.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.16%

3.81%

+0.35%

Volatility

MEM vs. PEMX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) is 12.91%, while Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) has a volatility of 14.35%. This indicates that MEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MEMPEMXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.91%

14.35%

-1.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.33%

22.77%

-1.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.57%

25.00%

-1.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.10%

19.49%

-0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.10%

19.49%

-0.39%

MEM vs. PEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEM has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than PEMX's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

MEM vs. PEMX - Dividend Comparison

MEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, less than PEMX's 5.04% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
MEM
Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF
2.86%3.56%7.81%0.01%0.53%
PEMX
Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF
5.04%7.00%5.00%0.72%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.90, MEM and PEMX 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.

PEMX has higher volatility (14.35%) compared to MEM (12.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEM dropped -19.10% vs PEMX's -14.91%.

On 3-year performance, PEMX leads with 33.94% vs 21.88% for MEM. On fees, MEM is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, MEM has been the lower-risk option at 12.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, PEMX has performed better with a 33.94% return vs 21.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MEM is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PEMX.

PEMX has the higher dividend yield at 5.04%, compared with 2.86% for MEM.

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Putnam. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MEM and 0.85% for PEMX.

PEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.78 vs 1.97), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MEM and PEMX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer