RFEM vs. EMCS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RFEM (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF) and EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. RFEM is actively managed, while EMCS is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFEM returned 8.99%/yr vs 7.95%/yr for EMCS. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFEM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for EMCS.

Performance

RFEM vs. EMCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFEM achieves a 21.66% return, which is significantly lower than EMCS's 33.83% return.

RFEM

• 1D: -1.39%
• 1M: 4.27%
• YTD: 21.66%
• 6M: 23.54%
• 1Y: 45.49%
• 3Y*: 24.73%
• 5Y*: 8.99%
• 10Y*: —

EMCS

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: 13.15%
• YTD: 33.83%
• 6M: 37.78%
• 1Y: 64.32%
• 3Y*: 27.65%
• 5Y*: 7.95%
• 10Y*: —

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

RFEM vs. EMCS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	21.66%	27.71%	10.85%	20.78%	-19.05%	0.97%	8.19%	20.33%	-3.32%
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	33.83%	38.71%	10.12%	5.68%	-23.58%	-2.02%	19.72%	19.54%	-0.59%

Correlation

The correlation between RFEM and EMCS is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2018	0.91

The correlation between RFEM and EMCS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. EMCS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFEM	EMCS
Technology	35.8%	44.5%
Financial Services	20.4%	29.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	9.1%
Industrials	7.9%	2.5%
Energy	6.6%	1.6%
Communication Services	5.7%	8.4%
Basic Materials	4.0%	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	0.0%
Healthcare	2.7%	0.0%
Utilities	1.4%	0.8%
Real Estate	0.7%	1.0%

Return for Risk

RFEM vs. EMCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFEM

RFEM Risk / Return Rank: 81
RFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
RFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
RFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 82
RFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
RFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

EMCS

EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 85
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

RFEM vs. EMCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). 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.

	RFEM	EMCS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	2.89	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	3.70	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.52	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.92	4.51	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.99	17.47	-1.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFEM vs. EMCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the EMCS Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM and EMCS, 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

	RFEM	EMCS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.71	2.89	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	0.39	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.55	-0.03

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. EMCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, smaller than the maximum EMCS drawdown of -44.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and EMCS.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFEM	EMCS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.22%	-44.86%	+2.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.65%	-14.32%	+2.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.81%	-16.73%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.73%	-42.06%	+7.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.39%	-1.20%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-16.61%	+4.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.85%	3.69%	-0.84%

Volatility

RFEM vs. EMCS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) is 6.86%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a volatility of 9.86%. This indicates that RFEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RFEM	EMCS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.86%	9.86%	-3.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.37%	19.42%	-5.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.85%	22.37%	-5.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.88%	20.62%	-2.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.81%	21.65%	-1.84%

RFEM vs. EMCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than EMCS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFEM vs. EMCS - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than EMCS's 1.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	1.24%	1.66%	0.67%	3.07%	2.26%	1.46%	1.40%	3.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RFEM First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF	1.68%	1.98%	3.64%	3.28%	7.74%	3.21%	1.22%	3.75%	2.37%	1.62%	3.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFEM and EMCS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, RFEM and EMCS 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, RFEM or EMCS?

EMCS has higher volatility (9.86%) compared to RFEM (6.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs EMCS's -44.86%.

Which ETF is better, RFEM or EMCS?

On 5-year performance, RFEM leads with 8.99% vs 7.95% for EMCS. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, RFEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RFEM or EMCS?

Over the 5-year period, RFEM has performed better with a 8.99% return vs 7.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFEM or EMCS?

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RFEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RFEM or EMCS?

RFEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 1.24% for EMCS.

What is the main difference between RFEM and EMCS?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.15% for EMCS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMCS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 2.71), 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.