MKOR vs. VNM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MKOR (Matthews Korea Active ETF) and VNM (VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF) are both Asia Pacific Equities funds. MKOR is actively managed, while VNM is passively managed. Over the past year, MKOR returned 173.39% vs 31.95% for VNM. At a 0.24 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MKOR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for VNM.

Performance

MKOR vs. VNM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR) and VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF (VNM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MKOR achieves a 93.84% return, which is significantly higher than VNM's -4.35% return.

MKOR

• 1D: -1.53%
• 1M: 10.38%
• YTD: 93.84%
• 6M: 106.44%
• 1Y: 173.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VNM

• 1D: 1.28%
• 1M: -4.53%
• YTD: -4.35%
• 6M: -1.63%
• 1Y: 31.95%
• 3Y*: 14.53%
• 5Y*: -0.58%
• 10Y*: 3.47%

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

MKOR vs. VNM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	93.84%	70.33%	-15.76%	-2.16%
VNM VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF	-4.35%	66.55%	-11.15%	-3.32%

Correlation

The correlation between MKOR and VNM is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2023	0.24

MKOR vs. VNM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MKOR	VNM
Technology	56.1%	1.7%
Industrials	15.0%	14.9%
Financial Services	8.0%	27.5%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	-
Communication Services	2.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.7%	14.4%
Healthcare	1.5%	-
Basic Materials	0.8%	7.9%
Energy	0.6%	1.2%
Utilities	0.6%	1.0%
Real Estate	-	31.4%

Return for Risk

MKOR vs. VNM — Risk / Return Rank

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

MKOR

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

VNM

VNM Risk / Return Rank: 34
VNM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
VNM Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
VNM Omega Ratio Rank: 32
VNM Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
VNM Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

MKOR vs. VNM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR) and VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF (VNM). 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.

	MKOR	VNM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.71	1.20	+3.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.71	1.77	+2.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.66	1.21	+0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.46	1.88	+6.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	32.58	4.79	+27.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MKOR vs. VNM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MKOR Sharpe Ratio is 4.71, which is higher than the VNM Sharpe Ratio of 1.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MKOR and VNM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MKOR	VNM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.71	1.20	+3.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.02	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.54	-0.02	+1.56

Drawdowns

MKOR vs. VNM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MKOR drawdown since its inception was -22.09%, smaller than the maximum VNM drawdown of -63.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MKOR and VNM.

Drawdown Indicators

	MKOR	VNM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.09%	-63.19%	+41.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.62%	-17.07%	-3.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-31.60%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-49.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-51.67%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.77%	-25.51%	+21.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.22%	-37.83%	+31.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.34%	6.71%	-1.37%

Volatility

MKOR vs. VNM - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Korea Active ETF (MKOR) has a higher volatility of 17.64% compared to VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF (VNM) at 5.33%. This indicates that MKOR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VNM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MKOR	VNM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.64%	5.33%	+12.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.35%	18.49%	+14.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.21%	26.80%	+10.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.05%	24.26%	+2.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.05%	23.46%	+3.59%

MKOR vs. VNM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MKOR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than VNM's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

MKOR vs. VNM - Dividend Comparison

MKOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than VNM's 0.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MKOR Matthews Korea Active ETF	1.35%	2.62%	5.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VNM VanEck Vectors Vietnam ETF	0.21%	0.20%	0.00%	5.21%	0.96%	0.49%	0.40%	0.76%	0.83%	1.14%	2.44%	3.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MKOR and VNM in my portfolio?

MKOR and VNM have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MKOR or VNM?

MKOR has higher volatility (17.64%) compared to VNM (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MKOR dropped -22.09% vs VNM's -63.19%.

Which ETF is better, MKOR or VNM?

On 1-year performance, MKOR leads with 173.39% vs 31.95% for VNM. On fees, VNM is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, VNM has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MKOR or VNM?

Over the 1-year period, MKOR has performed better with a 173.39% return vs 31.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MKOR or VNM?

VNM is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MKOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MKOR or VNM?

MKOR has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.21% for VNM.

What is the main difference between MKOR and VNM?

They also come from different issuers: Matthews and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MKOR and 0.68% for VNM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MKOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.71 vs 1.20), 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.