OSEA vs. EMES

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OSEA (Harbor International Compounders ETF) and EMES (Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OSEA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund actively managed by Harbor, while EMES is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Harbor. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OSEA returned 7.05% vs 46.81% for EMES. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OSEA charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for EMES.

Performance

OSEA vs. EMES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) and Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OSEA achieves a 0.79% return, which is significantly lower than EMES's 28.30% return.

OSEA

• 1D: -0.88%
• 1M: 1.06%
• YTD: 0.79%
• 6M: 1.49%
• 1Y: 7.05%
• 3Y*: 7.38%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMES

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 5.92%
• YTD: 28.30%
• 6M: 29.99%
• 1Y: 46.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OSEA vs. EMES - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OSEA Harbor International Compounders ETF	0.79%	7.97%
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF	28.30%	12.63%

Correlation

The correlation between OSEA and EMES is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2025	0.71

The correlation between OSEA and EMES has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

OSEA vs. EMES - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OSEA	EMES
Technology	23.4%	42.9%
Industrials	20.6%	16.3%
Financial Services	14.5%	14.2%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	14.8%
Consumer Defensive	10.2%	3.1%
Healthcare	10.1%	1.1%
Communication Services	6.5%	4.7%
Basic Materials	5.8%	-
Utilities	3.9%	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	3.0%

Return for Risk

OSEA vs. EMES — Risk / Return Rank

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

OSEA

OSEA Risk / Return Rank: 17
OSEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
OSEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
OSEA Omega Ratio Rank: 15
OSEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
OSEA Martin Ratio Rank: 20

EMES

EMES Risk / Return Rank: 71
EMES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
EMES Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
EMES Omega Ratio Rank: 70
EMES Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
EMES Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

OSEA vs. EMES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) and Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES). 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.

	OSEA	EMES	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.47	2.25	-1.78
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.76	2.98	-2.22
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.41	-0.32
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.64	3.62	-2.98
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.29	14.07	-11.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OSEA vs. EMES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OSEA Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is lower than the EMES Sharpe Ratio of 2.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OSEA and EMES, 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

	OSEA	EMES	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47	2.25	-1.78
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	2.06	-1.28

Drawdowns

OSEA vs. EMES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OSEA drawdown since its inception was -18.14%, which is greater than EMES's maximum drawdown of -12.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OSEA and EMES.

Drawdown Indicators

	OSEA	EMES	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.14%	-12.98%	-5.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.08%	-12.98%	+1.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.02%	-1.25%	-1.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.82%	-2.07%	-1.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	3.34%	-0.25%

Volatility

OSEA vs. EMES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harbor International Compounders ETF (OSEA) is 5.42%, while Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMES) has a volatility of 8.70%. This indicates that OSEA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OSEA	EMES	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.42%	8.70%	-3.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.05%	18.31%	-6.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.13%	20.89%	-5.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.62%	20.56%	-3.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.62%	20.56%	-3.94%

OSEA vs. EMES - Expense Ratio Comparison

OSEA has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than EMES's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

OSEA vs. EMES - Dividend Comparison

OSEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, more than EMES's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EMES Harbor Emerging Markets Select ETF	0.42%	0.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
OSEA Harbor International Compounders ETF	1.23%	1.24%	0.51%	0.65%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OSEA and EMES in my portfolio?

OSEA and EMES have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OSEA or EMES?

EMES has higher volatility (8.70%) compared to OSEA (5.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OSEA dropped -18.14% vs EMES's -12.98%.

Which ETF is better, OSEA or EMES?

On 1-year performance, EMES leads with 46.81% vs 7.05% for OSEA. On fees, OSEA is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, OSEA has been the lower-risk option at 5.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OSEA or EMES?

Over the 1-year period, EMES has performed better with a 46.81% return vs 7.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OSEA or EMES?

OSEA is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for EMES.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OSEA or EMES?

OSEA has the higher dividend yield at 1.23%, compared with 0.42% for EMES.

What is the main difference between OSEA and EMES?

OSEA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while EMES is Emerging Markets Diversified. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for OSEA and 0.65% for EMES.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMES currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 0.47), 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.