PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MFEM vs. EMDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MFEM vs. EMDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MFEM achieves a 31.49% return, which is significantly higher than EMDV's 1.17% return.


MFEM

1D
-1.14%
1M
9.48%
YTD
31.49%
6M
33.22%
1Y
54.64%
3Y*
23.28%
5Y*
8.84%
10Y*

EMDV

1D
-1.57%
1M
0.78%
YTD
1.17%
6M
1.13%
1Y
7.88%
3Y*
2.77%
5Y*
-3.15%
10Y*
2.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MFEM vs. EMDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MFEM
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
31.49%25.33%4.73%15.14%-19.50%10.77%11.33%15.26%-14.64%4.82%
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
1.17%11.90%0.06%-1.03%-18.19%1.11%-0.09%14.93%-7.52%7.55%

Correlation

The correlation between MFEM and EMDV is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 7, 2017

0.83

The correlation between MFEM and EMDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

MFEM vs. EMDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MFEM
EMDV

Technology

23.1%
22.5%

Financial Services

17.7%
24.1%

Basic Materials

15.1%
1.9%

Industrials

12.2%
6.2%

Energy

8.7%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
6.2%

Communication Services

4.8%
6.2%

Utilities

3.9%
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
16.4%

Healthcare

1.7%
8.2%

Real Estate

1.1%

-

Technology

MFEM
23.1%
EMDV
22.5%

Financial Services

MFEM
17.7%
EMDV
24.1%

Basic Materials

MFEM
15.1%
EMDV
1.9%

Industrials

MFEM
12.2%
EMDV
6.2%

Energy

MFEM
8.7%
EMDV

-

Consumer Cyclical

MFEM
8.3%
EMDV
6.2%

Communication Services

MFEM
4.8%
EMDV
6.2%

Utilities

MFEM
3.9%
EMDV
8.3%

Consumer Defensive

MFEM
3.5%
EMDV
16.4%

Healthcare

MFEM
1.7%
EMDV
8.2%

Real Estate

MFEM
1.1%
EMDV

-

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

MFEM vs. EMDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

MFEM
MFEM Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
MFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
MFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
MFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
MFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

EMDV
EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
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.

MFEM vs. EMDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). 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.


MFEMEMDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

1.13

+0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.27

1.09

+3.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.72

3.33

+12.39

MFEM vs. EMDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is higher than the EMDV Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MFEM and EMDV, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MFEMEMDVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.87

0.71

+2.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

-0.21

+0.74

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.22

+0.22

Drawdowns

MFEM vs. EMDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MFEM drawdown since its inception was -43.32%, which is greater than EMDV's maximum drawdown of -39.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MFEM and EMDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MFEMEMDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.32%

-39.20%

-4.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.86%

-7.24%

-5.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.22%

-20.71%

+1.49%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.39%

-34.97%

+3.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.14%

-14.80%

+13.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.49%

-13.55%

+2.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.49%

2.37%

+1.12%

Volatility

MFEM vs. EMDV - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) has a higher volatility of 8.47% compared to ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) at 4.17%. This indicates that MFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MFEMEMDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.47%

4.17%

+4.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.92%

9.21%

+7.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.11%

11.21%

+7.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.60%

15.42%

+1.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.40%

18.26%

+1.14%

MFEM vs. EMDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

MFEM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than EMDV's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

MFEM vs. EMDV - Dividend Comparison

MFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, less than EMDV's 2.41% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
2.41%2.46%2.79%1.88%3.68%2.12%3.12%2.38%1.27%2.09%2.87%
MFEM
PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
2.12%2.77%5.89%4.01%7.01%29.96%1.70%2.37%1.18%0.21%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MFEM and EMDV have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MFEM has higher volatility (8.47%) compared to EMDV (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MFEM dropped -43.32% vs EMDV's -39.20%.

On 5-year performance, MFEM leads with 8.84% vs -3.15% for EMDV. On fees, MFEM is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, EMDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MFEM has performed better with a 8.84% return vs -3.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MFEM is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMDV.

EMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 2.12% for MFEM.

MFEM tracks RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Market Index, while EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MFEM and 0.60% for EMDV.

MFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MFEM and EMDV

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