PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QEMM vs. EMDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QEMM vs. EMDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEMM achieves a 24.39% return, which is significantly higher than EMDV's 1.17% return. Over the past 10 years, QEMM has outperformed EMDV with an annualized return of 8.96%, while EMDV has yielded a comparatively lower 2.64% annualized return.


QEMM

1D
-1.21%
1M
6.69%
YTD
24.39%
6M
26.00%
1Y
42.27%
3Y*
19.52%
5Y*
7.37%
10Y*
8.96%

EMDV

1D
-1.57%
1M
0.78%
YTD
1.17%
6M
1.13%
1Y
7.88%
3Y*
2.77%
5Y*
-3.15%
10Y*
2.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QEMM vs. EMDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QEMM
SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF
24.39%21.92%4.98%12.50%-17.82%6.34%9.95%15.40%-13.33%31.50%
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
1.17%11.90%0.06%-1.03%-18.19%1.11%-0.09%14.93%-7.52%26.98%

Correlation

The correlation between QEMM and EMDV is 0.80, 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

0.80

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 28, 2016

0.81

The correlation between QEMM and EMDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

QEMM vs. EMDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QEMM
EMDV

Technology

33.8%
22.5%

Financial Services

19.6%
24.1%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
6.2%

Industrials

7.2%
6.2%

Communication Services

6.4%
6.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.1%
16.4%

Energy

5.7%

-

Basic Materials

5.6%
1.9%

Healthcare

3.5%
8.2%

Utilities

3.0%
8.3%

Real Estate

0.8%

-

Technology

QEMM
33.8%
EMDV
22.5%

Financial Services

QEMM
19.6%
EMDV
24.1%

Consumer Cyclical

QEMM
8.3%
EMDV
6.2%

Industrials

QEMM
7.2%
EMDV
6.2%

Communication Services

QEMM
6.4%
EMDV
6.2%

Consumer Defensive

QEMM
6.1%
EMDV
16.4%

Energy

QEMM
5.7%
EMDV

-

Basic Materials

QEMM
5.6%
EMDV
1.9%

Healthcare

QEMM
3.5%
EMDV
8.2%

Utilities

QEMM
3.0%
EMDV
8.3%

Real Estate

QEMM
0.8%
EMDV

-

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

QEMM vs. EMDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

QEMM
QEMM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QEMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QEMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QEMM Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
QEMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
QEMM Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

EMDV
EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 2020
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QEMM vs. EMDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV). 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.


QEMMEMDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.13

+0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.08

1.09

+2.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.92

3.33

+11.59

QEMM vs. EMDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is higher than the EMDV Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEMM and EMDV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QEMMEMDVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.54

0.71

+1.84

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

-0.21

+0.69

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.15

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.34

0.22

+0.12

Drawdowns

QEMM vs. EMDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEMM drawdown since its inception was -36.89%, smaller than the maximum EMDV drawdown of -39.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEMM and EMDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QEMMEMDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.89%

-39.20%

+2.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.40%

-7.24%

-3.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.03%

-20.71%

+3.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.49%

-34.97%

+7.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.89%

-39.20%

+2.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.21%

-14.80%

+13.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.64%

-13.55%

+2.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.84%

2.37%

+0.47%

Volatility

QEMM vs. EMDV - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) has a higher volatility of 7.29% compared to ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) at 4.17%. This indicates that QEMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QEMMEMDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

4.17%

+3.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.78%

9.21%

+5.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.69%

11.21%

+5.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.23%

15.42%

-0.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.89%

18.26%

-1.37%

QEMM vs. EMDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEMM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than EMDV's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

QEMM vs. EMDV - Dividend Comparison

QEMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, more than EMDV's 2.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
2.41%2.46%2.79%1.88%3.68%2.12%3.12%2.38%1.27%2.09%2.87%0.00%
QEMM
SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF
4.34%4.90%5.17%4.88%4.07%2.35%2.48%3.05%2.86%2.11%2.03%2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


QEMM and EMDV have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QEMM has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to EMDV (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEMM dropped -36.89% vs EMDV's -39.20%.

On 10-year performance, QEMM leads with 8.96% vs 2.64% for EMDV. On fees, QEMM is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EMDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QEMM has performed better with a 8.96% return vs 2.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QEMM is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMDV.

QEMM has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 2.41% for EMDV.

QEMM tracks MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEMM and 0.60% for EMDV.

QEMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 0.71), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QEMM and EMDV

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