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

Performance

RFEM vs. QEMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM). 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 21.66% return, which is significantly lower than QEMM's 24.39% return.


RFEM

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

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

RFEM vs. QEMM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFEM
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF
21.66%27.71%10.85%20.78%-19.05%0.97%8.19%20.33%-18.80%35.73%
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%

Correlation

The correlation between RFEM and QEMM is 0.91, 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

0.91

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 Jun 16, 2016

0.88

The correlation between RFEM and QEMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. QEMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFEM
QEMM

Technology

35.8%
33.8%

Financial Services

20.4%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%
8.3%

Industrials

7.9%
7.2%

Energy

6.6%
5.7%

Communication Services

5.7%
6.4%

Basic Materials

4.0%
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
6.1%

Healthcare

2.7%
3.5%

Utilities

1.4%
3.0%

Real Estate

0.7%
0.8%

Technology

RFEM
35.8%
QEMM
33.8%

Financial Services

RFEM
20.4%
QEMM
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

RFEM
11.4%
QEMM
8.3%

Industrials

RFEM
7.9%
QEMM
7.2%

Energy

RFEM
6.6%
QEMM
5.7%

Communication Services

RFEM
5.7%
QEMM
6.4%

Basic Materials

RFEM
4.0%
QEMM
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

RFEM
3.4%
QEMM
6.1%

Healthcare

RFEM
2.7%
QEMM
3.5%

Utilities

RFEM
1.4%
QEMM
3.0%

Real Estate

RFEM
0.7%
QEMM
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

RFEM vs. QEMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFEM
RFEM Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
RFEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
RFEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

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
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. QEMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


RFEMQEMMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.22

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.48

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.92

4.08

-0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.99

14.92

+1.07

RFEM vs. QEMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the QEMM Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM and QEMM, 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


RFEMQEMMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.71

2.54

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

0.49

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.34

+0.18

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. QEMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, which is greater than QEMM's maximum drawdown of -36.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and QEMM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFEMQEMMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.22%

-36.89%

-5.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.65%

-10.40%

-1.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.81%

-17.03%

+1.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.73%

-27.49%

-7.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.39%

-1.21%

-0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.98%

-10.64%

-1.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.85%

2.84%

+0.01%

Volatility

RFEM vs. QEMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) is 6.86%, while SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) has a volatility of 7.29%. This indicates that RFEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QEMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFEMQEMMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.86%

7.29%

-0.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.37%

14.78%

-0.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.85%

16.69%

+0.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.88%

15.23%

+2.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.81%

16.89%

+2.92%

RFEM vs. QEMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QEMM's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFEM vs. QEMM - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than QEMM's 4.34% 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%
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%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, RFEM and QEMM 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.

QEMM has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to RFEM (6.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs QEMM's -36.89%.

On 5-year performance, RFEM leads with 8.99% vs 7.37% for QEMM. On fees, QEMM is cheaper at 0.30% 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.

Over the 5-year period, RFEM has performed better with a 8.99% return vs 7.37%. 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 0.95% for RFEM.

QEMM has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 1.68% for RFEM.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.30% for QEMM.

RFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.54), 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 QEMM

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