NWFFX vs. RLEMX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

NWFFX (American Funds New World Fund Class F-1) and RLEMX (Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, NWFFX returned 9.97%/yr vs 9.84%/yr for RLEMX. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. NWFFX charges 0.96%/yr vs 1.38%/yr for RLEMX.

Performance

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in American Funds New World Fund Class F-1 (NWFFX) and Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6 (RLEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NWFFX achieves a 11.61% return, which is significantly lower than RLEMX's 24.08% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with NWFFX having a 9.97% annualized return and RLEMX not far behind at 9.84%.

NWFFX

• 1D: 3.30%
• 1M: -1.66%
• 6M: 5.35%
• YTD: 11.61%
• 1Y: 26.26%
• 3Y*: 15.03%
• 5Y*: 6.10%
• 10Y*: 9.97%
• ALL TIME*: 9.21%

RLEMX

• 1D: 2.12%
• 1M: 2.22%
• 6M: 13.36%
• YTD: 24.08%
• 1Y: 46.85%
• 3Y*: 25.12%
• 5Y*: 14.34%
• 10Y*: 9.84%
• ALL TIME*: 11.56%

*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)
NWFFX American Funds New World Fund Class F-1	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
RLEMX Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NWFFX American Funds New World Fund Class F-1	11.61%	28.17%	6.46%	15.80%	-22.08%	4.69%	24.81%	27.54%	-12.34%	32.56%
RLEMX Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6	24.08%	41.38%	7.60%	22.42%	-14.86%	5.43%	-0.02%	17.99%	-18.11%	28.02%

Correlation

The correlation between NWFFX and RLEMX is 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.85
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2016	0.85

The correlation between NWFFX and RLEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NWFFX vs. RLEMX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NWFFX

NWFFX Risk / Return Rank: 46
NWFFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
NWFFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
NWFFX Omega Ratio Rank: 49
NWFFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
NWFFX Martin Ratio Rank: 45

RLEMX

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

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.

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Funds New World Fund Class F-1 (NWFFX) and Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6 (RLEMX). 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.

	NWFFX	RLEMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	2.94	-1.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	3.80	-1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.52	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.85	4.18	-2.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.72	14.19	-7.46

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NWFFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the RLEMX Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NWFFX and RLEMX, 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

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NWFFX drawdown since its inception was -56.72%, which is greater than RLEMX's maximum drawdown of -44.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NWFFX and RLEMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NWFFX	RLEMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-56.72%	-44.12%	-12.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.03%	-10.41%	-2.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.18%	-14.25%	-0.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.69%	-29.17%	-4.52%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-33.69%	-44.12%	+10.43%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.89%	-2.25%	-3.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.73%	-10.36%	+0.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.59%	3.07%	+0.52%

Volatility

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Volatility Comparison

American Funds New World Fund Class F-1 (NWFFX) has a higher volatility of 7.07% compared to Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6 (RLEMX) at 5.13%. This indicates that NWFFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RLEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NWFFX	RLEMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.07%	5.13%	+1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.91%	12.94%	+2.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.73%	14.84%	+2.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.97%	14.60%	+1.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.33%	16.39%	-0.06%

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NWFFX has a 0.96% expense ratio, which is lower than RLEMX's 1.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

NWFFX vs. RLEMX - Dividend Comparison

NWFFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.15%, more than RLEMX's 1.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NWFFX American Funds New World Fund Class F-1	5.15%	5.75%	3.70%	2.48%	0.88%	6.95%	0.10%	3.70%	2.22%	1.92%	0.93%	0.65%
RLEMX Lazard Emerging Markets Equity Portfolio Class R6	1.65%	2.05%	3.10%	3.76%	5.92%	4.89%	2.11%	2.45%	2.10%	1.99%	1.48%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NWFFX and RLEMX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, NWFFX and RLEMX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NWFFX or RLEMX?

NWFFX has higher volatility (7.07%) compared to RLEMX (5.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NWFFX dropped -56.72% vs RLEMX's -44.12%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RLEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 1.36), 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.