PCEM vs. EMEQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PCEM (Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF) and EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCEM charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for EMEQ.

Performance

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF (PCEM) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PCEM

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMEQ

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: 23.68%
• YTD: 78.09%
• 6M: 88.05%
• 1Y: 166.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCEM Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF	6.00%	12.55%	0.32%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	78.09%	69.78%	-1.91%

Correlation

The correlation between PCEM and EMEQ is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 12, 2024	0.61

The correlation between PCEM and EMEQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (1 year) to 0.61 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PCEM	EMEQ
Technology	43.3%	56.6%
Consumer Cyclical	17.5%	8.2%
Industrials	13.0%	5.8%
Financial Services	11.7%	11.1%
Healthcare	7.1%	1.0%
Communication Services	5.0%	5.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	2.9%
Basic Materials	-	1.8%
Energy	-	7.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PCEM vs. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 96
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF (PCEM) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCEM	EMEQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	5.22	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	—	2.95	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	PCEM	EMEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-19.99%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-17.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-1.28%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-3.97%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.47%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCEM	EMEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	15.18%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	28.51%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	32.10%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	29.97%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	29.97%	—

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCEM has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCEM vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

PCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than EMEQ's 1.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.55%	2.76%	0.84%
PCEM Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCEM and EMEQ in my portfolio?

PCEM and EMEQ have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PCEM or EMEQ?

On fees, EMEQ is cheaper at 0.86% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCEM or EMEQ?

EMEQ is cheaper with a 0.86% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PCEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCEM or EMEQ?

EMEQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.55%, compared with 0.37% for PCEM.

What is the main difference between PCEM and EMEQ?

They also come from different issuers: Polen Capital and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for PCEM and 0.86% for EMEQ.