PG vs. EEM
PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) is a stock, while EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) is Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net). Over the past 10 years, PG returned 8.96%/yr vs 9.91%/yr for EEM. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
PG vs. EEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PG achieves a 5.93% return, which is significantly lower than EEM's 24.07% return. Over the past 10 years, PG has underperformed EEM with an annualized return of 8.96%, while EEM has yielded a comparatively higher 9.91% annualized return.
PG
- 1D
- 0.86%
- 1M
- 4.83%
- YTD
- 5.93%
- 6M
- 6.28%
- 1Y
- -3.97%
- 3Y*
- 3.69%
- 5Y*
- 4.73%
- 10Y*
- 8.96%
EEM
- 1D
- 0.56%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- YTD
- 24.07%
- 6M
- 26.94%
- 1Y
- 47.57%
- 3Y*
- 21.60%
- 5Y*
- 6.56%
- 10Y*
- 9.91%
PG vs. EEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 5.93% | -12.26% | 17.25% | -0.86% | -5.05% | 20.52% | 14.15% | 39.70% | 3.57% | 12.69% |
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 24.07% | 33.98% | 6.49% | 8.95% | -20.56% | -3.63% | 17.02% | 18.22% | -15.31% | 37.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between PG and EEM is 0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.09 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 14, 2003 | 0.32 |
Over the past year, the correlation between PG and EEM has dropped to 0.01 - well below their long-term average of 0.32, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PG vs. EEM — Risk / Return Rank
PG
EEM
PG vs. EEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM). 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.
| PG | EEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.40 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.37 | 3.36 | -3.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.68 | 12.38 | -13.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PG vs. EEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PG drawdown since its inception was -54.25%, smaller than the maximum EEM drawdown of -66.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PG and EEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PG | EEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -54.25% | -66.43% | +12.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.52% | -13.52% | -2.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.15% | -17.29% | -3.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.77% | -37.49% | +13.72% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.77% | -39.82% | +16.05% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.29% | -4.12% | -9.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.16% | -16.00% | +3.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.80% | 3.67% | +5.13% |
Volatility
PG vs. EEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) is 6.99%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) has a volatility of 10.80%. This indicates that PG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PG | EEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.99% | 10.80% | -3.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.01% | 19.39% | -4.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.78% | 21.64% | -2.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.82% | 19.26% | -1.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.05% | 20.64% | -1.59% |
Dividends
PG vs. EEM - Dividend Comparison
PG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, more than EEM's 1.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEM iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 1.79% | 2.22% | 2.43% | 2.63% | 2.50% | 1.99% | 1.45% | 2.76% | 2.24% | 1.89% | 1.89% | 2.49% |
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 2.85% | 2.91% | 2.36% | 2.55% | 2.38% | 2.08% | 2.24% | 2.37% | 3.09% | 2.98% | 3.18% | 3.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PG and EEM have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EEM has higher volatility (10.80%) compared to PG (6.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PG dropped -54.25% vs EEM's -66.43%.
EEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.10 vs -0.30), 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.
Find the right allocation for PG and EEM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer