SETM vs. EPU

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

SETM (Sprott Critical Materials ETF) and EPU (iShares MSCI Peru ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SETM is a Materials fund tracking the Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index, while EPU is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Peru Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SETM returned 18.54%/yr vs 42.43%/yr for EPU. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SETM charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for EPU.

Performance

SETM vs. EPU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM) and iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SETM achieves a -2.45% return, which is significantly lower than EPU's 18.75% return.

SETM

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: -17.28%
• 6M: -19.37%
• YTD: -2.45%
• 1Y: 44.18%
• 3Y*: 18.54%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.02%

EPU

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -3.76%
• 6M: 3.98%
• YTD: 18.75%
• 1Y: 78.54%
• 3Y*: 42.43%
• 5Y*: 29.59%
• 10Y*: 13.58%
• ALL TIME*: 10.56%

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

SETM vs. EPU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	-2.45%	95.27%	-13.24%	-13.11%
EPU iShares MSCI Peru ETF	18.75%	86.87%	21.73%	14.33%

Correlation

The correlation between SETM and EPU is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.72

The correlation between SETM and EPU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

SETM vs. EPU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SETM	EPU
Basic Materials	74.1%	49.5%
Energy	25.1%	-
Industrials	0.8%	2.9%
Technology	0.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	3.3%
Communication Services	-	1.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.5%
Financial Services	-	31.6%
Healthcare	-	1.0%
Real Estate	-	3.0%
Utilities	-	2.9%

Return for Risk

SETM vs. EPU — Risk / Return Rank

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

SETM

SETM Risk / Return Rank: 36
SETM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
SETM Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
SETM Omega Ratio Rank: 35
SETM Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
SETM Martin Ratio Rank: 35

EPU

EPU Risk / Return Rank: 85
EPU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EPU Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
EPU Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EPU Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EPU Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

SETM vs. EPU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM) and iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU). 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.

	SETM	EPU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	2.49	-1.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	2.91	-1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.39	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.53	3.79	-2.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.99	10.35	-6.35

SETM vs. EPU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SETM Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the EPU Sharpe Ratio of 2.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SETM and EPU, 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

SETM vs. EPU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SETM drawdown since its inception was -42.81%, smaller than the maximum EPU drawdown of -60.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SETM and EPU.

Drawdown Indicators

	SETM	EPU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.81%	-60.62%	+17.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.92%	-20.85%	-8.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-42.81%	-20.85%	-21.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.59%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-50.97%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.92%	-8.45%	-20.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.21%	-18.75%	+3.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.09%	7.61%	+3.48%

Volatility

SETM vs. EPU - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Critical Materials ETF (SETM) has a higher volatility of 9.73% compared to iShares MSCI Peru ETF (EPU) at 7.88%. This indicates that SETM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EPU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SETM	EPU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.73%	7.88%	+1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	37.09%	27.14%	+9.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	46.76%	31.72%	+15.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.18%	25.21%	+11.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.18%	23.66%	+13.52%

SETM vs. EPU - Expense Ratio Comparison

SETM has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than EPU's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

SETM vs. EPU - Dividend Comparison

SETM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%, less than EPU's 2.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EPU iShares MSCI Peru ETF	2.02%	1.63%	5.78%	4.17%	5.56%	3.13%	1.91%	2.67%	1.53%	3.30%	0.85%	1.90%
SETM Sprott Critical Materials ETF	1.60%	1.56%	2.07%	2.47%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SETM and EPU in my portfolio?

SETM and EPU have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SETM or EPU?

SETM has higher volatility (9.73%) compared to EPU (7.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SETM dropped -42.81% vs EPU's -60.62%.

Which ETF is better, SETM or EPU?

On 3-year performance, EPU leads with 42.43% vs 18.54% for SETM. On fees, EPU is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, EPU has been the lower-risk option at 7.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SETM or EPU?

Over the 3-year period, EPU has performed better with a 42.43% return vs 18.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SETM or EPU?

EPU is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SETM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SETM or EPU?

EPU has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 1.60% for SETM.

What is the main difference between SETM and EPU?

SETM is categorized as Materials, while EPU is Mid Cap Blend Equities. SETM tracks Nasdaq Sprott Critical Materials Index, while EPU tracks MSCI All Peru Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for SETM and 0.59% for EPU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EPU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.49 vs 0.95), 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.