OBOR vs. EMSF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

OBOR (KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. OBOR is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, OBOR returned 12.75% vs 42.52% for EMSF. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

OBOR vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF (OBOR) 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, OBOR achieves a 0.11% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 30.73% return.

OBOR

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: 2.33%
• 6M: -6.55%
• YTD: 0.11%
• 1Y: 12.75%
• 3Y*: 9.00%
• 5Y*: 0.52%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.24%

EMSF

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -8.36%
• 6M: 17.49%
• YTD: 30.73%
• 1Y: 42.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.92%

*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)
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	$80.02K	$93.23K	$184.42K
OBOR KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF	$4.43K	$6.82K	$15.71K

OBOR vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
OBOR KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF	0.11%	27.86%	8.55%	0.49%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	30.73%	19.20%	-3.09%	0.98%

Correlation

The correlation between OBOR and EMSF is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023	0.59

The correlation between OBOR and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

OBOR vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OBOR	EMSF
Basic Materials	26.2%	-
Industrials	25.5%	11.0%
Financial Services	23.1%	15.0%
Utilities	13.4%	2.1%
Energy	7.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	3.3%	6.3%
Technology	0.6%	52.8%
Healthcare	0.2%	6.0%
Communication Services	0.2%	1.7%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.6%
Real Estate	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

OBOR vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

OBOR

OBOR Risk / Return Rank: 29
OBOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
OBOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
OBOR Omega Ratio Rank: 30
OBOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
OBOR Martin Ratio Rank: 25

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 57
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

OBOR vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF (OBOR) 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.

	OBOR	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.76	1.36	-0.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	1.86	-0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.25	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.86	2.10	-1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.99	7.05	-5.06

OBOR vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OBOR Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OBOR 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

OBOR vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OBOR drawdown since its inception was -41.54%, which is greater than EMSF's maximum drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OBOR and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	OBOR	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.54%	-24.75%	-16.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.95%	-19.49%	+4.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.67%	-15.62%	+3.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.91%	-5.91%	-10.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.48%	5.80%	+0.68%

Volatility

OBOR vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF (OBOR) is 4.35%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 10.79%. This indicates that OBOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OBOR	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.35%	10.79%	-6.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.90%	26.54%	-11.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.10%	30.10%	-13.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.19%	24.40%	-8.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.51%	24.40%	-5.89%

OBOR vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

OBOR vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

OBOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, more than EMSF's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.44%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OBOR KraneShares MSCI One Belt One Road Index ETF	1.94%	1.94%	3.87%	3.40%	4.75%	3.26%	2.04%	4.33%	0.02%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OBOR and EMSF in my portfolio?

OBOR and EMSF have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OBOR or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to OBOR (4.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OBOR dropped -41.54% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, OBOR or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs 12.75% for OBOR. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, OBOR has been the lower-risk option at 4.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OBOR or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs 12.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OBOR or EMSF?

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

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

OBOR has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 1.44% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between OBOR and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: CICC and Matthews.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 0.76), 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.