MEMA vs. EMSF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MEMA (Man Active Emerging Markets Alternative ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MEMA charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

MEMA vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Man Active Emerging Markets Alternative ETF (MEMA) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMA achieves a 26.01% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 45.34% return.

MEMA

• 1D: -1.65%
• 1M: 5.93%
• YTD: 26.01%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMSF

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: 8.61%
• YTD: 45.34%
• 6M: 40.08%
• 1Y: 63.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MEMA vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MEMA Man Active Emerging Markets Alternative ETF	26.01%	2.94%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	45.34%	5.14%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMA and EMSF is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2025	0.92

Return for Risk

MEMA vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 76
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 72
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

MEMA vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Man Active Emerging Markets Alternative ETF (MEMA) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MEMA	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.03	0.98	+2.05

Drawdowns

MEMA vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEMA drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEMA and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEMA	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.12%	-24.75%	+11.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-14.57%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.65%	-1.10%	-0.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.70%	-5.72%	+3.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.35%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	MEMA	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	9.96%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	21.98%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.81%	25.35%	+0.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.81%	22.75%	+3.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.81%	22.75%	+3.06%

MEMA vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEMA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

MEMA vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

MEMA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.30%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
MEMA Man Active Emerging Markets Alternative ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEMA and EMSF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, MEMA and EMSF 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 ETF is better, MEMA or EMSF?

On fees, EMSF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEMA or EMSF?

EMSF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for MEMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MEMA or EMSF?

EMSF has the higher dividend yield at 1.30%, compared with 0.00% for MEMA.

What is the main difference between MEMA and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: Man Group and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for MEMA and 0.79% for EMSF.