PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MEMS vs. OAEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MEMS vs. OAEM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMS achieves a 27.41% return, which is significantly lower than OAEM's 41.17% return.


MEMS

1D
0.56%
1M
4.44%
YTD
27.41%
6M
27.66%
1Y
34.10%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

OAEM

1D
0.53%
1M
10.03%
YTD
41.17%
6M
46.62%
1Y
65.66%
3Y*
22.81%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MEMS vs. OAEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MEMS
Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF
27.41%11.12%-5.32%
OAEM
OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF
41.17%26.67%4.00%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMS and OAEM is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024

0.75

The correlation between MEMS and OAEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.77 - 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

MEMS vs. OAEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEMS
MEMS Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
MEMS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MEMS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
MEMS Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
MEMS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
MEMS Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank

OAEM
OAEM Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
OAEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OAEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
OAEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
OAEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
OAEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

MEMS vs. OAEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) and OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM). 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.


MEMSOAEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.47

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

4.51

-1.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.37

18.00

-9.63

MEMS vs. OAEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEMS Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is lower than the OAEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEMS and OAEM, 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

MEMS vs. OAEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEMS drawdown since its inception was -22.24%, which is greater than OAEM's maximum drawdown of -17.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEMS and OAEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MEMSOAEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.24%

-17.05%

-5.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.05%

-14.63%

+1.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

0.00%

-0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.17%

-3.85%

-1.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.08%

3.66%

+0.42%

Volatility

MEMS vs. OAEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) is 8.16%, while OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) has a volatility of 12.02%. This indicates that MEMS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OAEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MEMSOAEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.16%

12.02%

-3.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.86%

22.34%

-3.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.56%

24.53%

-2.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.78%

20.16%

-0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.78%

20.16%

-0.38%

MEMS vs. OAEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEMS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than OAEM's 1.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

MEMS vs. OAEM - Dividend Comparison

MEMS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.21%, more than OAEM's 0.55% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
MEMS
Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF
2.21%2.81%1.42%0.00%0.00%
OAEM
OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF
0.55%0.77%0.91%1.63%0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions


MEMS and OAEM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

OAEM has higher volatility (12.02%) compared to MEMS (8.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEMS dropped -22.24% vs OAEM's -17.05%.

On 1-year performance, OAEM leads with 65.66% vs 34.10% for MEMS. On fees, MEMS is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, MEMS has been the lower-risk option at 8.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, OAEM has performed better with a 65.66% return vs 34.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MEMS is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for OAEM.

MEMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.21%, compared with 0.55% for OAEM.

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Oneascent. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MEMS and 1.25% for OAEM.

OAEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 1.59), 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 MEMS and OAEM

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