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

Performance

RFEM vs. SDEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM). 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 higher than SDEM's 10.35% return.


RFEM

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

SDEM

1D
-1.52%
1M
1.02%
YTD
10.35%
6M
10.30%
1Y
30.03%
3Y*
19.61%
5Y*
4.14%
10Y*
4.84%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFEM vs. SDEM - 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%
SDEM
Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF
10.35%32.01%4.02%12.64%-21.53%2.11%-11.13%17.56%-17.40%16.57%

Correlation

The correlation between RFEM and SDEM is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.69

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

0.72

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

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2016

0.77

The correlation between RFEM and SDEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFEM vs. SDEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFEM
SDEM

Technology

35.8%
5.6%

Financial Services

20.4%
24.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.4%
5.5%

Industrials

7.9%
12.9%

Energy

6.6%
5.1%

Communication Services

5.7%
5.7%

Basic Materials

4.0%
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.4%
5.6%

Healthcare

2.7%
2.0%

Utilities

1.4%
7.9%

Real Estate

0.7%
3.2%

Technology

RFEM
35.8%
SDEM
5.6%

Financial Services

RFEM
20.4%
SDEM
24.2%

Consumer Cyclical

RFEM
11.4%
SDEM
5.5%

Industrials

RFEM
7.9%
SDEM
12.9%

Energy

RFEM
6.6%
SDEM
5.1%

Communication Services

RFEM
5.7%
SDEM
5.7%

Basic Materials

RFEM
4.0%
SDEM
1.2%

Consumer Defensive

RFEM
3.4%
SDEM
5.6%

Healthcare

RFEM
2.7%
SDEM
2.0%

Utilities

RFEM
1.4%
SDEM
7.9%

Real Estate

RFEM
0.7%
SDEM
3.2%

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. SDEM — 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

SDEM
SDEM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
SDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
SDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
SDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
SDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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. SDEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM). 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.


RFEMSDEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.38

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.92

3.34

+0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.99

11.64

+4.35

RFEM vs. SDEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is comparable to the SDEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFEM and SDEM, 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


RFEMSDEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.71

2.22

+0.49

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

0.24

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.18

+0.34

Drawdowns

RFEM vs. SDEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFEM drawdown since its inception was -42.22%, smaller than the maximum SDEM drawdown of -47.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFEM and SDEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFEMSDEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.22%

-47.38%

+5.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.65%

-9.03%

-2.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.81%

-12.34%

-3.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.73%

-36.70%

+1.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.39%

-4.20%

+2.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.98%

-20.71%

+8.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.85%

2.59%

+0.26%

Volatility

RFEM vs. SDEM - Volatility Comparison

First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF (RFEM) has a higher volatility of 6.86% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF (SDEM) at 4.90%. This indicates that RFEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SDEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFEMSDEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.86%

4.90%

+1.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.37%

11.14%

+3.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.85%

13.57%

+3.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.88%

17.43%

+0.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.81%

19.22%

+0.59%

RFEM vs. SDEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFEM has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SDEM's 0.67% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFEM vs. SDEM - Dividend Comparison

RFEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than SDEM's 5.42% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
SDEM
Global X MSCI SuperDividend Emerging Markets ETF
5.42%5.27%7.28%7.50%8.86%8.14%6.30%6.47%6.55%5.01%5.06%6.14%

Frequently Asked Questions


RFEM and SDEM have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RFEM has higher volatility (6.86%) compared to SDEM (4.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFEM dropped -42.22% vs SDEM's -47.38%.

On 5-year performance, RFEM leads with 8.99% vs 4.14% for SDEM. On fees, SDEM is cheaper at 0.67% per year. On volatility, SDEM has been the lower-risk option at 4.90%. 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 4.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SDEM is cheaper with a 0.67% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for RFEM.

SDEM has the higher dividend yield at 5.42%, compared with 1.68% for RFEM.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RFEM and 0.67% for SDEM.

RFEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.22), 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 SDEM

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