MEMS vs. FTHF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MEMS (Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF) and FTHF (First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. MEMS is actively managed, while FTHF is passively managed. Over the past year, MEMS returned 16.71% vs 75.55% for FTHF. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MEMS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FTHF.

Performance

MEMS vs. FTHF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMS achieves a 13.60% return, which is significantly lower than FTHF's 34.68% return.

MEMS

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -8.27%
• 6M: 6.87%
• YTD: 13.60%
• 1Y: 16.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.24%

FTHF

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -5.25%
• 6M: 17.86%
• YTD: 34.68%
• 1Y: 75.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 37.84%

*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)
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	$333.76K	$497.21K	$541.76K
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	$37.98K	$24.77K	$32.48K

MEMS vs. FTHF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	13.60%	11.12%	-5.32%
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	34.68%	65.30%	-3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMS and FTHF is 0.79, 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.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.74

The correlation between MEMS and FTHF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEMS vs. FTHF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEMS	FTHF
Technology	34.1%	50.9%
Financial Services	16.5%	25.0%
Industrials	15.7%	5.4%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	0.6%
Healthcare	8.3%	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	3.0%
Communication Services	2.7%	0.8%
Real Estate	2.2%	-
Energy	2.0%	4.6%
Basic Materials	1.4%	7.5%
Utilities	1.0%	1.8%

Return for Risk

MEMS vs. FTHF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEMS

MEMS Risk / Return Rank: 32
MEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
MEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
MEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 30
MEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
MEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 35

FTHF

FTHF Risk / Return Rank: 87
FTHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FTHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FTHF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FTHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FTHF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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. FTHF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). 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	FTHF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	2.21	-1.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.12	2.69	-1.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.38	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	3.59	-2.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.42	12.54	-9.12

MEMS vs. FTHF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEMS Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the FTHF Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEMS and FTHF, 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. FTHF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEMS drawdown since its inception was -22.24%, which is greater than FTHF's maximum drawdown of -21.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEMS and FTHF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEMS	FTHF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.24%	-21.05%	-1.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.29%	-21.05%	+7.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.85%	-15.75%	+4.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.23%	-4.53%	-0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.71%	6.01%	-1.30%

Volatility

MEMS vs. FTHF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) is 6.92%, while First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) has a volatility of 14.08%. This indicates that MEMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEMS	FTHF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.92%	14.08%	-7.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.35%	32.04%	-11.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.65%	34.28%	-11.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.06%	27.89%	-7.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.06%	27.89%	-7.83%

MEMS vs. FTHF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEMS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than FTHF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MEMS vs. FTHF - Dividend Comparison

MEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, less than FTHF's 3.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	3.38%	4.40%	3.34%	0.51%
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	2.47%	2.81%	1.42%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEMS and FTHF in my portfolio?

MEMS and FTHF have a correlation of 0.79, 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 FTHF?

FTHF has higher volatility (14.08%) compared to MEMS (6.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEMS dropped -22.24% vs FTHF's -21.05%.

Which ETF is better, MEMS or FTHF?

On 1-year performance, FTHF leads with 75.55% vs 16.71% for MEMS. On fees, FTHF is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, MEMS has been the lower-risk option at 6.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MEMS or FTHF?

Over the 1-year period, FTHF has performed better with a 75.55% return vs 16.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEMS or FTHF?

FTHF is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MEMS.

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

FTHF has the higher dividend yield at 3.38%, compared with 2.47% for MEMS.

What is the main difference between MEMS and FTHF?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MEMS and 0.75% for FTHF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTHF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 0.71), 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.