PEMX vs. CCNR

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

PEMX (Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF) and CCNR (ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PEMX is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Putnam, while CCNR is a Natural Resources fund actively managed by ALPS. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PEMX returned 68.11% vs 55.12% for CCNR. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PEMX charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for CCNR.

Performance

PEMX vs. CCNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PEMX achieves a 37.04% return, which is significantly higher than CCNR's 21.92% return.

PEMX

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 8.00%
• YTD: 37.04%
• 6M: 41.88%
• 1Y: 68.11%
• 3Y*: 32.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CCNR

• 1D: 0.78%
• 1M: -3.42%
• YTD: 21.92%
• 6M: 23.45%
• 1Y: 55.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PEMX vs. CCNR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PEMX Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF	37.04%	34.01%	-4.66%
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	21.92%	46.48%	-7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between PEMX and CCNR is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2024	0.52

The correlation between PEMX and CCNR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PEMX vs. CCNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PEMX

PEMX Risk / Return Rank: 89
PEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
PEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
PEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 89
PEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
PEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 89

CCNR

CCNR Risk / Return Rank: 93
CCNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CCNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
CCNR Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CCNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
CCNR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

PEMX vs. CCNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) and ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR). 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.

	PEMX	CCNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	3.05	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.40	3.71	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.51	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.56	7.25	-2.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.36	25.70	-8.34

PEMX vs. CCNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PEMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is comparable to the CCNR Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PEMX and CCNR, 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

PEMX vs. CCNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PEMX drawdown since its inception was -14.91%, smaller than the maximum CCNR drawdown of -20.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PEMX and CCNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PEMX	CCNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.91%	-20.06%	+5.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.45%	-7.85%	-6.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.98%	-5.21%	+2.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.86%	-3.58%	+0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.79%	2.21%	+1.58%

Volatility

PEMX vs. CCNR - Volatility Comparison

Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF (PEMX) has a higher volatility of 12.65% compared to ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF (CCNR) at 6.78%. This indicates that PEMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PEMX	CCNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.65%	6.78%	+5.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.23%	13.94%	+7.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.64%	18.66%	+4.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.94%	20.14%	-1.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.94%	20.14%	-1.20%

PEMX vs. CCNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PEMX has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CCNR's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

PEMX vs. CCNR - Dividend Comparison

PEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.11%, more than CCNR's 2.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CCNR ALPS/CoreCommodity Natural Resources ETF	2.86%	3.48%	1.27%	0.00%
PEMX Putnam Emerging Markets Ex-China ETF	5.11%	7.00%	5.00%	0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PEMX and CCNR in my portfolio?

PEMX and CCNR have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PEMX or CCNR?

PEMX has higher volatility (12.65%) compared to CCNR (6.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PEMX dropped -14.91% vs CCNR's -20.06%.

Which ETF is better, PEMX or CCNR?

On 1-year performance, PEMX leads with 68.11% vs 55.12% for CCNR. On fees, CCNR is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, CCNR has been the lower-risk option at 6.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PEMX or CCNR?

Over the 1-year period, PEMX has performed better with a 68.11% return vs 55.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PEMX or CCNR?

CCNR is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PEMX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PEMX or CCNR?

PEMX has the higher dividend yield at 5.11%, compared with 2.86% for CCNR.

What is the main difference between PEMX and CCNR?

PEMX is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while CCNR is Natural Resources. They also come from different issuers: Putnam and ALPS. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PEMX and 0.39% for CCNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 2.79), 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.