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

Performance

QEMM vs. RNEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM). 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 RNEM's -1.51% 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%

RNEM

1D
-1.34%
1M
-1.29%
YTD
-1.51%
6M
-0.99%
1Y
3.68%
3Y*
7.58%
5Y*
3.88%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QEMM vs. RNEM - 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%12.73%
RNEM
First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF
-1.51%15.58%-1.47%23.43%-8.75%6.16%-8.16%12.76%-9.34%11.97%

Correlation

The correlation between QEMM and RNEM is 0.81, 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

0.81

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

0.81

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

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2017

0.72

The correlation between QEMM and RNEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

QEMM vs. RNEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QEMM
RNEM

Technology

33.8%
6.0%

Financial Services

19.6%
34.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
10.1%

Industrials

7.2%
4.1%

Communication Services

6.4%
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.1%
5.9%

Energy

5.7%
7.6%

Basic Materials

5.6%
13.7%

Healthcare

3.5%
4.6%

Utilities

3.0%
3.7%

Real Estate

0.8%
0.8%

Technology

QEMM
33.8%
RNEM
6.0%

Financial Services

QEMM
19.6%
RNEM
34.7%

Consumer Cyclical

QEMM
8.3%
RNEM
10.1%

Industrials

QEMM
7.2%
RNEM
4.1%

Communication Services

QEMM
6.4%
RNEM
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

QEMM
6.1%
RNEM
5.9%

Energy

QEMM
5.7%
RNEM
7.6%

Basic Materials

QEMM
5.6%
RNEM
13.7%

Healthcare

QEMM
3.5%
RNEM
4.6%

Utilities

QEMM
3.0%
RNEM
3.7%

Real Estate

QEMM
0.8%
RNEM
0.8%

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. RNEM — 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

RNEM
RNEM Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
RNEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RNEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
RNEM Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
RNEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
RNEM Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
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. RNEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM). 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.


QEMMRNEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.06

+0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.08

0.34

+3.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.92

0.80

+14.12

QEMM vs. RNEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is higher than the RNEM Sharpe Ratio of 0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEMM and RNEM, 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


QEMMRNEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.54

0.28

+2.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

0.27

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.34

0.23

+0.11

Drawdowns

QEMM vs. RNEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEMM drawdown since its inception was -36.89%, roughly equal to the maximum RNEM drawdown of -38.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEMM and RNEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QEMMRNEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.89%

-38.38%

+1.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.40%

-10.71%

+0.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.03%

-13.09%

-3.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.49%

-21.41%

-6.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.21%

-7.46%

+6.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.64%

-9.30%

-1.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.84%

4.59%

-1.75%

Volatility

QEMM vs. RNEM - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) has a higher volatility of 7.29% compared to First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM) at 4.23%. This indicates that QEMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RNEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QEMMRNEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

4.23%

+3.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.78%

10.37%

+4.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.69%

13.31%

+3.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.23%

14.40%

+0.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.89%

17.22%

-0.33%

QEMM vs. RNEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEMM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than RNEM's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

QEMM vs. RNEM - Dividend Comparison

QEMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, more than RNEM's 2.79% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
RNEM
First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF
2.79%2.75%3.45%1.63%2.99%3.20%3.01%2.85%2.85%2.28%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QEMM and RNEM have a correlation of 0.81, 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 RNEM (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEMM dropped -36.89% vs RNEM's -38.38%.

On 5-year performance, QEMM leads with 7.37% vs 3.88% for RNEM. On fees, QEMM is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, RNEM has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QEMM has performed better with a 7.37% return vs 3.88%. 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 0.75% for RNEM.

QEMM has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 2.79% for RNEM.

QEMM tracks MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while RNEM tracks Nasdaq Riskalyze Emerging Markets Equity Select Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEMM and 0.75% for RNEM.

QEMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 0.28), 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 RNEM

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