OAEM vs. EMDM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

OAEM (OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF) and EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. OAEM is actively managed, while EMDM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, OAEM returned 18.13%/yr vs 26.67%/yr for EMDM. Their correlation of 0.86 means they have usually moved in the same direction. OAEM charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMDM.

Performance

OAEM vs. EMDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with OAEM having a 26.54% return and EMDM slightly higher at 27.86%.

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%

EMDM

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: -3.52%
• 6M: 13.18%
• YTD: 27.86%
• 1Y: 66.00%
• 3Y*: 26.67%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 26.46%

*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)
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	$660.85K	$757.43K	$571.79K
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	$452.20K	$547.88K	$1.41M

OAEM vs. EMDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	26.54%	26.67%	0.43%	7.51%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	27.86%	59.68%	-4.93%	14.75%

Correlation

The correlation between OAEM and EMDM 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.	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2023	0.86

The correlation between OAEM and EMDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

OAEM vs. EMDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OAEM	EMDM
Technology	45.0%	39.9%
Industrials	15.8%	2.6%
Financial Services	15.7%	25.6%
Basic Materials	7.1%	12.7%
Consumer Cyclical	5.1%	5.3%
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Energy	3.1%	4.8%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	3.1%
Communication Services	1.3%	4.0%
Utilities	0.9%	1.5%
Healthcare	-	0.5%

Return for Risk

OAEM vs. EMDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

EMDM

EMDM Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EMDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
EMDM Omega Ratio Rank: 89
EMDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
EMDM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

OAEM vs. EMDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). 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.

	OAEM	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.38	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	2.91	-0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.41	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	4.23	-1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.24	13.54	-4.29

OAEM vs. EMDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OAEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the EMDM Sharpe Ratio of 2.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OAEM and EMDM, 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

OAEM vs. EMDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OAEM drawdown since its inception was -17.05%, smaller than the maximum EMDM drawdown of -18.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OAEM and EMDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	OAEM	EMDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.05%	-18.81%	+1.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.09%	-15.65%	+0.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.05%	-18.81%	+1.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.37%	-10.88%	+0.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.98%	-4.20%	+0.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.64%	4.88%	-0.24%

Volatility

OAEM vs. EMDM - Volatility Comparison

OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) has a higher volatility of 10.55% compared to First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) at 9.95%. This indicates that OAEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OAEM	EMDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.55%	9.95%	+0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	25.40%	25.55%	-0.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.41%	27.87%	-0.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.93%	21.16%	-0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.93%	21.16%	-0.23%

OAEM vs. EMDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

OAEM has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EMDM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

OAEM vs. EMDM - Dividend Comparison

OAEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than EMDM's 2.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.96%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%	0.00%
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	0.61%	0.77%	0.91%	1.63%	0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OAEM and EMDM in my portfolio?

OAEM and EMDM have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OAEM or EMDM?

OAEM has higher volatility (10.55%) compared to EMDM (9.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OAEM dropped -17.05% vs EMDM's -18.81%.

Which ETF is better, OAEM or EMDM?

On 3-year performance, EMDM leads with 26.67% vs 18.13% for OAEM. On fees, EMDM is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, EMDM has been the lower-risk option at 9.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OAEM or EMDM?

Over the 3-year period, EMDM has performed better with a 26.67% return vs 18.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OAEM or EMDM?

EMDM is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for OAEM.

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

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 0.61% for OAEM.

What is the main difference between OAEM and EMDM?

They also come from different issuers: Oneascent and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for OAEM and 0.75% for EMDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.38 vs 1.57), 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.