PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RFEM vs. EMXC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RFEM vs. EMXC

Last updated Jul 12, 2026
Documentation

RFEM (First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. RFEM is actively managed, while EMXC is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, RFEM returned 9.59%/yr vs 12.47%/yr for EMXC. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFEM charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

RFEM vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFEM achieves a 20.69% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 36.07% return.

RFEM

1D
0.70%
1M
0.68%
6M
17.22%
YTD
20.69%
1Y
35.70%
3Y*
23.15%
5Y*
9.59%
10Y*
9.91%

EMXC

1D
0.33%
1M
-0.86%
6M
29.93%
YTD
36.07%
1Y
59.28%
3Y*
26.48%
5Y*
12.47%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFEM vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFEM
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF		20.69%27.71%10.85%20.78%-19.05%0.97%8.19%20.33%-18.80%7.67%
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF		36.07%35.14%2.68%18.96%-19.56%8.54%12.76%15.80%-12.96%7.16%

Correlation

The correlation between RFEM and EMXC is 0.89, 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

0.89

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

0.90

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

0.90

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

0.86

The correlation between RFEM and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RFEM
EMXC

Technology

36.3%
52.4%

Financial Services

21.0%
17.4%

Consumer Cyclical

12.7%
4.1%

Industrials

8.0%
6.9%

Energy

5.9%
3.4%

Communication Services

5.0%
3.0%

Basic Materials

3.9%
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
2.4%

Healthcare

2.4%
1.8%

Utilities

1.3%
1.9%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.8%

Technology

RFEM
36.3%
EMXC
52.4%

Financial Services

RFEM
21.0%
EMXC
17.4%

Consumer Cyclical

RFEM
12.7%
EMXC
4.1%

Industrials

RFEM
8.0%
EMXC
6.9%

Energy

RFEM
5.9%
EMXC
3.4%

Communication Services

RFEM
5.0%
EMXC
3.0%

Basic Materials

RFEM
3.9%
EMXC
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

RFEM
2.9%
EMXC
2.4%

Healthcare

RFEM
2.4%
EMXC
1.8%

Utilities

RFEM
1.3%
EMXC
1.9%

Real Estate

RFEM
0.7%
EMXC
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.

First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF

Often compared with RFEM:
RFEM vs. FEMRFEM vs. ALTYRFEM vs. NFTYRFEM vs. INDYRFEM vs. AVEMRFEM vs. EEMRFEM vs. ECOW
Often compared with EMXC:
EMXC vs. XCEMEMXC vs. IEMGEMXC vs. VWOEMXC vs. EEMEMXC vs. SPEMEMXC vs. VEXCEMXC vs. VNM

Return for Risk

RFEM vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RFEM
RFEM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
RFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
RFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
EMXC
EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

RFEM vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.

RFEMEMXCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.95
2.26

-0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.62
2.78

-0.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.42

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.06

4.08

-1.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.53

14.49

-2.96

RFEM vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is comparable to the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM and EMXC, 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...

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, roughly equal to the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and EMXC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RFEMEMXCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.22%

-42.81%

+0.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.65%

-14.41%

+2.76%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.81%

-19.12%

+3.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.30%

-28.91%

-4.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.22%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.18%

-7.68%

+5.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.89%

-10.13%

-1.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.09%

4.05%

-0.96%

Volatility

RFEM vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) is 6.66%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.84%. This indicates that RFEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RFEMEMXCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.66%

12.84%

-6.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.18%

24.31%

-8.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.31%

26.01%

-7.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.16%

18.62%

-0.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.70%

20.33%

-0.63%

RFEM vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFEM vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.62%, more than EMXC's 1.96% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF		1.96%2.82%2.69%1.83%2.85%1.78%1.45%3.25%2.63%0.99%0.00%
RFEM
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF		2.62%1.98%3.64%3.28%7.74%3.21%1.22%3.75%2.37%1.62%3.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

RFEM and EMXC have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMXC has higher volatility (12.84%) compared to RFEM (6.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.47% vs 9.59% for RFEM. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, RFEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.47% return vs 9.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RFEM.

RFEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 1.96% for EMXC.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.49% for EMXC.

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.95), 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 RFEM and EMXC

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