MINV vs. EMSF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

MINV (Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MINV is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Matthews, while EMSF is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Matthews. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MINV returned 102.33% vs 70.16% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

MINV vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MINV achieves a 68.29% return, which is significantly higher than EMSF's 54.93% return.

MINV

• 1D: 1.26%
• 1M: 12.75%
• YTD: 68.29%
• 6M: 69.95%
• 1Y: 102.33%
• 3Y*: 37.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMSF

• 1D: 2.13%
• 1M: 12.23%
• YTD: 54.93%
• 6M: 56.33%
• 1Y: 70.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MINV vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MINV Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF	68.29%	30.85%	17.32%	7.48%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	54.93%	19.20%	-3.09%	0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between MINV and EMSF is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.86

The correlation between MINV and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MINV vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINV

MINV Risk / Return Rank: 94
MINV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
MINV Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
MINV Omega Ratio Rank: 93
MINV Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
MINV Martin Ratio Rank: 93

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

MINV vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	MINV	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.68	2.57	+1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.26	3.15	+1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.62	1.45	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.43	4.84	+4.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.79	15.83	+7.97

MINV vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINV Sharpe Ratio is 3.68, which is higher than the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINV and EMSF, 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

MINV vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINV drawdown since its inception was -23.49%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINV and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MINV	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.49%	-24.75%	+1.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.91%	-14.57%	+3.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.82%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.03%	-5.72%	-2.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.32%	4.45%	-0.13%

Volatility

MINV vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) has a higher volatility of 14.71% compared to Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) at 12.41%. This indicates that MINV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MINV	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.71%	12.41%	+2.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.54%	23.61%	+0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.01%	27.55%	+0.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.48%	23.59%	+0.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.48%	23.59%	+0.89%

MINV vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both MINV and EMSF have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

MINV vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

MINV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than EMSF's 1.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.21%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
MINV Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF	0.90%	1.51%	0.25%	1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MINV and EMSF in my portfolio?

MINV and EMSF have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MINV or EMSF?

MINV has higher volatility (14.71%) compared to EMSF (12.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINV dropped -23.49% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, MINV or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, MINV leads with 102.33% vs 70.16% for EMSF. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, EMSF has been the lower-risk option at 12.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MINV or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, MINV has performed better with a 102.33% return vs 70.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MINV or EMSF?

MINV and EMSF have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MINV or EMSF?

EMSF has the higher dividend yield at 1.21%, compared with 0.90% for MINV.

What is the main difference between MINV and EMSF?

MINV is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while EMSF is Emerging Markets Diversified.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.68 vs 2.56), 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.