RWEM vs. FTHF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

RWEM (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and FTHF (First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - RWEM tracks the FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index while FTHF tracks the Emerging Markets Human Flourishing Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RWEM returned 37.77% vs 75.55% for FTHF. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. RWEM charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FTHF.

Performance

RWEM vs. FTHF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWEM achieves a 18.79% return, which is significantly lower than FTHF's 34.68% return.

RWEM

• 1D: 4.75%
• 1M: 2.58%
• 6M: 12.70%
• YTD: 18.79%
• 1Y: 37.77%
• 3Y*: 19.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.53%

FTHF

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: -5.25%
• 6M: 17.86%
• YTD: 34.68%
• 1Y: 75.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 37.84%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	$333.76K	$497.21K	$541.76K
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$318.11K	$309.19K	$568.12K

RWEM vs. FTHF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF	18.79%	28.17%	7.24%	16.87%
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	34.68%	65.30%	-8.14%	18.14%

Correlation

The correlation between RWEM and FTHF is 0.46, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2023	0.62

The correlation between RWEM and FTHF shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RWEM vs. FTHF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWEM	FTHF
Technology	41.1%	50.9%
Financial Services	18.1%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	0.6%
Communication Services	7.9%	0.8%
Industrials	5.1%	5.4%
Basic Materials	4.7%	7.5%
Energy	4.1%	4.6%
Healthcare	3.7%	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	3.0%
Utilities	2.1%	1.8%
Real Estate	0.3%	-

Return for Risk

RWEM vs. FTHF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

RWEM

RWEM Risk / Return Rank: 48
RWEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
RWEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
RWEM Omega Ratio Rank: 42
RWEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
RWEM Martin Ratio Rank: 52

FTHF

FTHF Risk / Return Rank: 87
FTHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FTHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FTHF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FTHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FTHF Martin Ratio Rank: 87

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

RWEM vs. FTHF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). 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.

	RWEM	FTHF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	2.21	-1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.47	2.69	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.38	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.34	3.59	-1.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.05	12.54	-6.49

RWEM vs. FTHF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWEM Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the FTHF Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWEM and FTHF, 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

RWEM vs. FTHF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWEM drawdown since its inception was -26.92%, which is greater than FTHF's maximum drawdown of -21.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWEM and FTHF.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWEM	FTHF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.92%	-21.05%	-5.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.39%	-21.05%	+5.66%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.56%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.26%	-15.75%	+7.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.58%	-4.53%	-5.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.93%	6.01%	-0.08%

Volatility

RWEM vs. FTHF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) is 11.80%, while First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) has a volatility of 14.08%. This indicates that RWEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RWEM	FTHF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.80%	14.08%	-2.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.65%	32.04%	-0.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.25%	34.28%	+2.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.91%	27.89%	-4.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.91%	27.89%	-4.98%

RWEM vs. FTHF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWEM has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is lower than FTHF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWEM vs. FTHF - Dividend Comparison

RWEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than FTHF's 3.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	3.38%	4.40%	3.34%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.81%	2.15%	3.59%	1.60%	5.59%	0.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWEM and FTHF in my portfolio?

RWEM and FTHF have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RWEM or FTHF?

FTHF has higher volatility (14.08%) compared to RWEM (11.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWEM dropped -26.92% vs FTHF's -21.05%.

Which ETF is better, RWEM or FTHF?

On 1-year performance, FTHF leads with 75.55% vs 37.77% for RWEM. On fees, RWEM is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, RWEM has been the lower-risk option at 11.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RWEM or FTHF?

Over the 1-year period, FTHF has performed better with a 75.55% return vs 37.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWEM or FTHF?

RWEM is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FTHF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWEM or FTHF?

FTHF has the higher dividend yield at 3.38%, compared with 1.81% for RWEM.

What is the main difference between RWEM and FTHF?

RWEM tracks FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index, while FTHF tracks Emerging Markets Human Flourishing Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RWEM and 0.75% for FTHF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTHF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 0.97), 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.