MEMS vs. EJAN

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

MEMS (Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF) and EJAN (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January) are both exchange-traded funds - MEMS is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while EJAN is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. MEMS is actively managed, while EJAN is passively managed. Over the past year, MEMS returned 22.43% vs 12.04% for EJAN. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.89% expense ratio.

Performance

MEMS vs. EJAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMS achieves a 20.04% return, which is significantly higher than EJAN's 7.14% return.

MEMS

• 1D: 3.08%
• 1M: -3.07%
• 6M: 12.20%
• YTD: 20.04%
• 1Y: 22.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.53%

EJAN

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: 1.70%
• 6M: 3.85%
• YTD: 7.14%
• 1Y: 12.04%
• 3Y*: 7.79%
• 5Y*: 3.54%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	$334.48K	$228.94K	$486.17K
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	$27.68K	$28.35K	$30.35K

MEMS vs. EJAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	20.04%	11.12%	-5.32%
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	7.14%	14.78%	5.07%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMS and EJAN is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.76

The correlation between MEMS and EJAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEMS vs. EJAN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEMS	EJAN
Technology	34.1%	45.2%
Financial Services	16.5%	18.5%
Industrials	15.7%	6.3%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	7.5%
Healthcare	8.3%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	2.6%
Communication Services	2.7%	6.0%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.0%
Energy	2.0%	3.2%
Basic Materials	1.4%	5.5%
Utilities	1.0%	1.8%

Return for Risk

MEMS vs. EJAN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MEMS

MEMS Risk / Return Rank: 37
MEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
MEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
MEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 35
MEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
MEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 39

EJAN

EJAN Risk / Return Rank: 53
EJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
EJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 64
EJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
EJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 59

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MEMS vs. EJAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). 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.

	MEMS	EJAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.98	1.40	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.47	2.01	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.31	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	1.82	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.73	7.98	-3.25

MEMS vs. EJAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEMS Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is comparable to the EJAN Sharpe Ratio of 1.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEMS and EJAN, 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

MEMS vs. EJAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEMS drawdown since its inception was -22.24%, roughly equal to the maximum EJAN drawdown of -22.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEMS and EJAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEMS	EJAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.24%	-22.23%	-0.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.29%	-6.63%	-6.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.80%	0.00%	-5.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.24%	-5.66%	+0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.76%	1.51%	+3.25%

Volatility

MEMS vs. EJAN - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) has a higher volatility of 8.18% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) at 2.70%. This indicates that MEMS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EJAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEMS	EJAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.18%	2.70%	+5.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.68%	8.21%	+12.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.97%	8.66%	+14.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.18%	11.16%	+9.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.18%	12.63%	+7.55%

MEMS vs. EJAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both MEMS and EJAN have an expense ratio of 0.89%.

Dividends

MEMS vs. EJAN - Dividend Comparison

MEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, while EJAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	2.34%	2.81%	1.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEMS and EJAN in my portfolio?

MEMS and EJAN have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MEMS or EJAN?

MEMS has higher volatility (8.18%) compared to EJAN (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEMS dropped -22.24% vs EJAN's -22.23%.

Which ETF is better, MEMS or EJAN?

On 1-year performance, MEMS leads with 22.43% vs 12.04% for EJAN. Both ETFs have the same 0.89% expense ratio. On volatility, EJAN has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MEMS or EJAN?

Over the 1-year period, MEMS has performed better with a 22.43% return vs 12.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEMS or EJAN?

MEMS and EJAN have the same expense ratio: 0.89% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MEMS or EJAN?

MEMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.00% for EJAN.

What is the main difference between MEMS and EJAN?

MEMS is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EJAN is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Innovator.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EJAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 0.98), 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.