OAEM vs. MEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OAEM (OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF) and MEM (Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, OAEM returned 21.19%/yr vs 23.26%/yr for MEM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OAEM charges 1.25%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MEM.

Performance

OAEM vs. MEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OAEM achieves a 36.06% return, which is significantly higher than MEM's 28.39% return.

OAEM

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: 7.11%
• YTD: 36.06%
• 6M: 43.08%
• 1Y: 62.43%
• 3Y*: 21.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MEM

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: 8.03%
• YTD: 28.39%
• 6M: 30.14%
• 1Y: 54.36%
• 3Y*: 23.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OAEM vs. MEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	36.06%	26.67%	0.43%	17.97%	1.97%
MEM Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF	28.39%	28.31%	10.11%	6.92%	2.33%

Correlation

The correlation between OAEM and MEM is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2022	0.83

The correlation between OAEM and MEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

OAEM vs. MEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OAEM	MEM
Technology	41.6%	37.5%
Industrials	15.7%	8.9%
Financial Services	15.3%	24.6%
Basic Materials	7.9%	9.2%
Consumer Cyclical	6.0%	9.1%
Utilities	4.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	1.4%
Communication Services	2.8%	5.6%
Energy	2.7%	2.9%
Healthcare	-	0.8%
Real Estate	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

OAEM vs. MEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

OAEM

OAEM Risk / Return Rank: 83
OAEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
OAEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
OAEM Omega Ratio Rank: 81
OAEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
OAEM Martin Ratio Rank: 86

MEM

MEM Risk / Return Rank: 77
MEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
MEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
MEM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
MEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MEM Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

OAEM vs. MEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) and Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM). 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.

	OAEM	MEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	2.65	+0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.53	3.47	+0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.47	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.29	3.74	+0.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.91	13.64	+4.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OAEM vs. MEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OAEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is comparable to the MEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OAEM and MEM, 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

	OAEM	MEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	2.65	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.12	1.14	-0.02

Drawdowns

OAEM vs. MEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OAEM drawdown since its inception was -17.05%, smaller than the maximum MEM drawdown of -19.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OAEM and MEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	OAEM	MEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.05%	-19.10%	+2.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.63%	-14.62%	-0.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.05%	-19.10%	+2.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-1.34%	+0.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.86%	-4.74%	+0.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.50%	4.00%	-0.50%

Volatility

OAEM vs. MEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) is 8.12%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF (MEM) has a volatility of 8.97%. This indicates that OAEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OAEM	MEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.12%	8.97%	-0.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.82%	17.95%	+1.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.32%	20.65%	+1.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.55%	18.31%	+1.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.55%	18.31%	+1.24%

OAEM vs. MEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

OAEM has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than MEM's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

OAEM vs. MEM - Dividend Comparison

OAEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%, less than MEM's 2.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
MEM Matthews Emerging Markets Equity Active ETF	2.77%	3.56%	7.81%	0.01%	0.53%
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF	0.57%	0.77%	0.91%	1.63%	0.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OAEM and MEM in my portfolio?

OAEM and MEM have a correlation of 0.84, 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 MEM?

MEM has higher volatility (8.97%) compared to OAEM (8.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OAEM dropped -17.05% vs MEM's -19.10%.

Which ETF is better, OAEM or MEM?

On 3-year performance, MEM leads with 23.26% vs 21.19% for OAEM. On fees, MEM is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, OAEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OAEM or MEM?

Over the 3-year period, MEM has performed better with a 23.26% return vs 21.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OAEM or MEM?

MEM is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for OAEM.

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

MEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.77%, compared with 0.57% for OAEM.

What is the main difference between OAEM and MEM?

They also come from different issuers: Oneascent and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for OAEM and 0.79% for MEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OAEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 2.65), 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.