PATN vs. KEMX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PATN (Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF) and KEMX (KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - PATN tracks the Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index while KEMX tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, PATN returned 65.39% vs 71.39% for KEMX. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PATN charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for KEMX.

Performance

PATN vs. KEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PATN achieves a 34.64% return, which is significantly lower than KEMX's 38.57% return.

PATN

• 1D: -5.19%
• 1M: 4.01%
• YTD: 34.64%
• 6M: 35.70%
• 1Y: 65.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KEMX

• 1D: -5.69%
• 1M: 5.55%
• YTD: 38.57%
• 6M: 40.16%
• 1Y: 71.39%
• 3Y*: 28.36%
• 5Y*: 13.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

PATN vs. KEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PATN Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF	34.64%	40.01%	-1.73%
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF	38.57%	38.28%	-7.15%

Correlation

The correlation between PATN and KEMX is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	0.85

The correlation between PATN and KEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PATN vs. KEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PATN	KEMX
Technology	52.5%	46.8%
Industrials	14.8%	7.6%
Healthcare	9.4%	1.5%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	5.5%
Communication Services	6.1%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	2.6%
Basic Materials	2.4%	7.6%
Energy	2.1%	4.0%
Financial Services	0.5%	18.7%
Real Estate	-	1.0%
Utilities	-	1.7%

Return for Risk

PATN vs. KEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

PATN

PATN Risk / Return Rank: 87
PATN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
PATN Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PATN Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PATN Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
PATN Martin Ratio Rank: 88

KEMX

KEMX Risk / Return Rank: 87
KEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
KEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
KEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 87
KEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
KEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

PATN vs. KEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX). 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.

	PATN	KEMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.75	2.84	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	3.38	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.51	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.56	4.67	-0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.76	17.76	0.00

PATN vs. KEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PATN Sharpe Ratio is 2.75, which is comparable to the KEMX Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PATN and KEMX, 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

PATN vs. KEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PATN drawdown since its inception was -16.77%, smaller than the maximum KEMX drawdown of -38.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PATN and KEMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	PATN	KEMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.77%	-38.80%	+22.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.40%	-15.36%	+0.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.62%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.19%	-5.69%	+0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.17%	-8.82%	+5.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.69%	4.03%	-0.34%

Volatility

PATN vs. KEMX - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF (PATN) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) have volatilities of 12.88% and 13.52%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PATN	KEMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.88%	13.52%	-0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.37%	23.20%	-1.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.92%	25.26%	-1.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.26%	18.96%	+3.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.26%	21.33%	+0.93%

PATN vs. KEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

PATN has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than KEMX's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

PATN vs. KEMX - Dividend Comparison

PATN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than KEMX's 2.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
KEMX KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF	2.37%	3.28%	3.39%	2.00%	4.10%	4.79%	1.69%	2.77%
PATN Pacer Nasdaq International Patent Leaders ETF	1.61%	2.25%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PATN and KEMX in my portfolio?

PATN and KEMX have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PATN or KEMX?

KEMX has higher volatility (13.52%) compared to PATN (12.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PATN dropped -16.77% vs KEMX's -38.80%.

Which ETF is better, PATN or KEMX?

On 1-year performance, KEMX leads with 71.39% vs 65.39% for PATN. On fees, KEMX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, PATN has been the lower-risk option at 12.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PATN or KEMX?

Over the 1-year period, KEMX has performed better with a 71.39% return vs 65.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PATN or KEMX?

KEMX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for PATN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PATN or KEMX?

KEMX has the higher dividend yield at 2.37%, compared with 1.61% for PATN.

What is the main difference between PATN and KEMX?

PATN tracks Nasdaq International Patent Leaders Index, while KEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and CICC. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for PATN and 0.25% for KEMX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.84 vs 2.75), 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.