RING vs. EMDM

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

RING (iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF) and EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RING is a Gold fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while EMDM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RING returned 44.87%/yr vs 30.34%/yr for EMDM. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RING charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMDM.

Performance

RING vs. EMDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RING achieves a -5.54% return, which is significantly lower than EMDM's 36.28% return.

RING

• 1D: 3.20%
• 1M: -14.81%
• YTD: -5.54%
• 6M: -4.18%
• 1Y: 54.08%
• 3Y*: 44.87%
• 5Y*: 18.76%
• 10Y*: 13.85%

EMDM

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 2.00%
• YTD: 36.28%
• 6M: 42.03%
• 1Y: 83.08%
• 3Y*: 30.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RING vs. EMDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	-5.54%	164.72%	15.98%	14.65%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	36.28%	59.68%	-4.93%	14.75%

Correlation

The correlation between RING and EMDM is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2023	0.47

The correlation between RING and EMDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

RING vs. EMDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RING	EMDM
Basic Materials	100.0%	15.1%
Communication Services	-	4.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	6.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	3.4%
Energy	-	6.3%
Financial Services	-	27.2%
Healthcare	-	0.5%
Industrials	-	3.3%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	32.1%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

RING vs. EMDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RING

RING Risk / Return Rank: 36
RING Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
RING Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
RING Omega Ratio Rank: 39
RING Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
RING Martin Ratio Rank: 33

EMDM

EMDM Risk / Return Rank: 92
EMDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
EMDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EMDM Omega Ratio Rank: 92
EMDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
EMDM Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

RING vs. EMDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). 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.

	RING	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	3.21	-2.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.62	3.78	-2.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.55	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.59	5.18	-3.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.45	20.59	-16.14

RING vs. EMDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RING Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is lower than the EMDM Sharpe Ratio of 3.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RING and EMDM, 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

RING vs. EMDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RING drawdown since its inception was -79.47%, which is greater than EMDM's maximum drawdown of -18.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RING and EMDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RING	EMDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.47%	-18.81%	-60.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.72%	-15.65%	-20.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.72%	-18.81%	-16.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-30.03%	-3.27%	-26.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.36%	-4.08%	-43.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.74%	3.93%	+8.81%

Volatility

RING vs. EMDM - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF (RING) has a higher volatility of 16.83% compared to First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) at 12.16%. This indicates that RING's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RING	EMDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.83%	12.16%	+4.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.11%	22.86%	+16.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.31%	25.23%	+22.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.81%	20.36%	+16.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.70%	20.36%	+16.34%

RING vs. EMDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RING has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than EMDM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

RING vs. EMDM - Dividend Comparison

RING's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, less than EMDM's 2.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.62%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RING iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF	0.89%	0.84%	1.43%	2.01%	2.29%	2.38%	0.83%	0.83%	0.70%	0.42%	1.41%	0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RING and EMDM in my portfolio?

RING and EMDM have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RING or EMDM?

RING has higher volatility (16.83%) compared to EMDM (12.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RING dropped -79.47% vs EMDM's -18.81%.

Which ETF is better, RING or EMDM?

On 3-year performance, RING leads with 44.87% vs 30.34% for EMDM. On fees, RING is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMDM has been the lower-risk option at 12.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RING or EMDM?

Over the 3-year period, RING has performed better with a 44.87% return vs 30.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RING or EMDM?

RING is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RING or EMDM?

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 0.89% for RING.

What is the main difference between RING and EMDM?

RING is categorized as Gold, while EMDM is Emerging Markets Diversified. RING tracks MSCI ACWI Select Gold Miners Investable Market Index, while EMDM tracks Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for RING and 0.75% for EMDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.21 vs 1.20), 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.