PPEM vs. MEMX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PPEM (Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF -) and MEMX (Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. PPEM is passively managed, while MEMX is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PPEM returned 25.49%/yr vs 26.82%/yr for MEMX. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PPEM charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for MEMX.

Performance

PPEM vs. MEMX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF - (PPEM) and Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PPEM having a 31.17% return and MEMX slightly higher at 32.03%.

PPEM

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 6.80%
• YTD: 31.17%
• 6M: 33.71%
• 1Y: 56.99%
• 3Y*: 25.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MEMX

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: 7.56%
• YTD: 32.03%
• 6M: 41.45%
• 1Y: 68.19%
• 3Y*: 26.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PPEM vs. MEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PPEM Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF -	31.17%	35.39%	7.50%	0.11%
MEMX Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF	32.03%	35.88%	5.50%	7.63%

Correlation

The correlation between PPEM and MEMX 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 23, 2023	0.83

The correlation between PPEM and MEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

PPEM vs. MEMX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PPEM	MEMX
Technology	50.2%	39.5%
Financial Services	16.0%	25.1%
Communication Services	6.9%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	5.9%	7.8%
Industrials	4.6%	9.6%
Basic Materials	3.8%	2.6%
Healthcare	2.6%	4.5%
Utilities	2.2%	1.1%
Real Estate	1.6%	1.5%
Energy	1.6%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	2.1%

Return for Risk

PPEM vs. MEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

PPEM

PPEM Risk / Return Rank: 81
PPEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
PPEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
PPEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
PPEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
PPEM Martin Ratio Rank: 79

MEMX

MEMX Risk / Return Rank: 88
MEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
MEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
MEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 89
MEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
MEMX 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.

PPEM vs. MEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF - (PPEM) and Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX). 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.

	PPEM	MEMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	3.18	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.56	4.00	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.56	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.75	4.66	-0.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.04	18.56	-3.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PPEM vs. MEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PPEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the MEMX Sharpe Ratio of 3.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PPEM and MEMX, 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

	PPEM	MEMX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.70	3.18	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	1.43	-0.26

Drawdowns

PPEM vs. MEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PPEM drawdown since its inception was -18.44%, roughly equal to the maximum MEMX drawdown of -19.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PPEM and MEMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	PPEM	MEMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.44%	-19.27%	+0.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.28%	-14.70%	-0.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.44%	-19.27%	+0.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.33%	-1.74%	-0.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.20%	-3.48%	-0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.80%	3.68%	+0.12%

Volatility

PPEM vs. MEMX - Volatility Comparison

Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF - (PPEM) and Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF (MEMX) have volatilities of 8.91% and 9.31%, 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

	PPEM	MEMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.91%	9.31%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.76%	19.07%	-0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.27%	21.55%	-0.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.30%	17.09%	+1.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.30%	17.09%	+1.21%

PPEM vs. MEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

PPEM has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than MEMX's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

PPEM vs. MEMX - Dividend Comparison

PPEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 49.33%, more than MEMX's 3.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MEMX Matthews Emerging Markets Ex China Active ETF	3.70%	4.88%	0.99%	1.13%
PPEM Putnam Panagora ESG Emerging Markets Equity ETF -	49.33%	6.05%	3.27%	1.94%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PPEM and MEMX in my portfolio?

PPEM and MEMX 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, PPEM or MEMX?

MEMX has higher volatility (9.31%) compared to PPEM (8.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PPEM dropped -18.44% vs MEMX's -19.27%.

Which ETF is better, PPEM or MEMX?

On 3-year performance, MEMX leads with 26.82% vs 25.49% for PPEM. On fees, PPEM is cheaper at 0.61% per year. On volatility, PPEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PPEM or MEMX?

Over the 3-year period, MEMX has performed better with a 26.82% return vs 25.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PPEM or MEMX?

PPEM is cheaper with a 0.61% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for MEMX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PPEM or MEMX?

PPEM has the higher dividend yield at 49.33%, compared with 3.70% for MEMX.

What is the main difference between PPEM and MEMX?

They also come from different issuers: Putnam and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for PPEM and 0.79% for MEMX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 2.70), 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.