MEMS vs. OAEM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MEMS (Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF) and OAEM (OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MEMS returned 16.71% vs 43.91% for OAEM. Their 0.75 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MEMS charges 0.89%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for OAEM.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MEMS achieves a 13.60% return, which is significantly lower than OAEM's 26.54% return.

MEMS

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

OAEM

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -2.87%
• 6M: 13.83%
• YTD: 26.54%
• 1Y: 43.91%
• 3Y*: 18.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 18.43%

*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)
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	$37.98K	$24.77K	$32.48K
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	$452.20K	$547.88K	$1.41M

MEMS vs. OAEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	13.60%	11.12%	-5.32%
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	26.54%	26.67%	4.00%

Correlation

The correlation between MEMS and OAEM is 0.78, 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.	0.78
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 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEMS vs. OAEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEMS	OAEM
Technology	34.1%	45.0%
Financial Services	16.5%	15.7%
Industrials	15.7%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	5.1%
Healthcare	8.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	2.1%
Communication Services	2.7%	1.3%
Real Estate	2.2%	3.9%
Energy	2.0%	3.1%
Basic Materials	1.4%	7.1%
Utilities	1.0%	0.9%

Return for Risk

MEMS vs. OAEM — 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

OAEM

OAEM Risk / Return Rank: 70
OAEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
OAEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
OAEM Omega Ratio Rank: 68
OAEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
OAEM Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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. 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.

	MEMS	OAEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.71	1.57	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.12	2.06	-0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.29	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.22	2.84	-1.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.42	9.24	-5.82

MEMS vs. OAEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEMS Sharpe Ratio is 0.71, which is lower than the OAEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEMS	OAEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.24%	-17.05%	-5.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.29%	-15.09%	+1.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.05%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.85%	-10.37%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.23%	-3.98%	-1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.71%	4.64%	+0.07%

Volatility

MEMS vs. OAEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF (MEMS) is 6.92%, while OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) has a volatility of 10.55%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	MEMS	OAEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.92%	10.55%	-3.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.35%	25.40%	-5.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.65%	27.41%	-4.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.06%	20.93%	-0.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.06%	20.93%	-0.87%

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 2.47%, more than OAEM's 0.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
MEMS Matthews Emerging Markets Discovery Active ETF	2.47%	2.81%	1.42%	0.00%	0.00%
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	0.61%	0.77%	0.91%	1.63%	0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEMS and OAEM in my portfolio?

MEMS and OAEM have a correlation of 0.78, 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 OAEM?

OAEM has higher volatility (10.55%) compared to MEMS (6.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEMS dropped -22.24% vs OAEM's -17.05%.

Which ETF is better, MEMS or OAEM?

On 1-year performance, OAEM leads with 43.91% vs 16.71% for MEMS. On fees, MEMS is cheaper at 0.89% 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 OAEM?

Over the 1-year period, OAEM has performed better with a 43.91% 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 OAEM?

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

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

MEMS has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.61% for OAEM.

What is the main difference between MEMS and OAEM?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OAEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 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.