REMG vs. IEMG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

REMG (Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. REMG is actively managed, while IEMG is passively managed. Over the past year, REMG returned 48.86% vs 43.66% for IEMG. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. REMG charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for IEMG.

Performance

REMG vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, REMG achieves a 24.01% return, which is significantly higher than IEMG's 21.95% return.

REMG

• 1D: -5.46%
• 1M: 1.92%
• YTD: 24.01%
• 6M: 25.35%
• 1Y: 48.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IEMG

• 1D: -5.44%
• 1M: 1.74%
• YTD: 21.95%
• 6M: 22.64%
• 1Y: 43.66%
• 3Y*: 22.14%
• 5Y*: 7.05%
• 10Y*: 10.38%

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

REMG vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
REMG Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF	24.01%	24.03%
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	21.95%	20.56%

Correlation

The correlation between REMG and IEMG is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2025	0.98

The correlation between REMG and IEMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

REMG vs. IEMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	REMG	IEMG
Technology	44.1%	42.1%
Financial Services	18.3%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	8.5%
Industrials	6.4%	8.0%
Basic Materials	5.6%	6.3%
Communication Services	5.4%	5.6%
Energy	3.5%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	2.8%
Healthcare	2.3%	3.2%
Real Estate	1.5%	1.6%
Utilities	1.1%	1.9%

Return for Risk

REMG vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

REMG

REMG Risk / Return Rank: 73
REMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
REMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
REMG Omega Ratio Rank: 74
REMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
REMG Martin Ratio Rank: 77

IEMG

IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 64
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 66
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

REMG vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.

	REMG	IEMG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	1.98	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.72	2.56	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.38	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.47	3.32	+0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.33	12.15	+1.19

REMG vs. IEMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current REMG Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the IEMG Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of REMG and IEMG, 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

REMG vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum REMG drawdown since its inception was -14.13%, smaller than the maximum IEMG drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for REMG and IEMG.

Drawdown Indicators

	REMG	IEMG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.13%	-38.71%	+24.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.13%	-13.21%	-0.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.21%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.75%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.46%	-5.44%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.05%	-12.93%	+10.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.67%	3.61%	+0.06%

Volatility

REMG vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison

Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF (REMG) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) have volatilities of 12.25% and 12.22%, 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

	REMG	IEMG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.25%	12.22%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.88%	20.14%	+0.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.12%	22.12%	+1.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.66%	18.99%	+3.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.66%	20.20%	+2.46%

REMG vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

REMG has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than IEMG's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

REMG vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison

REMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, less than IEMG's 2.21% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF	2.21%	2.75%	3.20%	2.89%	2.71%	3.06%	1.87%	3.15%	2.76%	2.35%	2.28%	2.53%
REMG Russell Investments Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.11%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both REMG and IEMG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, REMG and IEMG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, REMG or IEMG?

REMG has higher volatility (12.25%) compared to IEMG (12.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, REMG dropped -14.13% vs IEMG's -38.71%.

Which ETF is better, REMG or IEMG?

On 1-year performance, REMG leads with 48.86% vs 43.66% for IEMG. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, REMG or IEMG?

Over the 1-year period, REMG has performed better with a 48.86% return vs 43.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, REMG or IEMG?

IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for REMG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, REMG or IEMG?

IEMG has the higher dividend yield at 2.21%, compared with 1.11% for REMG.

What is the main difference between REMG and IEMG?

They also come from different issuers: Russell and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for REMG and 0.09% for IEMG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

REMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.98), 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.