SPEM vs. EMEQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SPEM (SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF) and EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. SPEM is passively managed, while EMEQ is actively managed. Over the past year, SPEM returned 22.14% vs 110.88% for EMEQ. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. SPEM charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for EMEQ.

Performance

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF (SPEM) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPEM achieves a 9.89% return, which is significantly lower than EMEQ's 53.76% return.

SPEM

• 1D: 0.77%
• 1M: -0.37%
• 6M: 4.56%
• YTD: 9.89%
• 1Y: 22.14%
• 3Y*: 15.56%
• 5Y*: 6.70%
• 10Y*: 8.53%
• ALL TIME*: 5.54%

EMEQ

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: -8.23%
• 6M: 30.45%
• YTD: 53.76%
• 1Y: 110.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 65.06%

*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)
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	$8.75M	$9.16M	$11.52M
SPEM SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF	$90.49M	$105.53M	$120.92M

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SPEM SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF	9.89%	25.63%	2.75%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	53.76%	69.78%	-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between SPEM and EMEQ is 0.82, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.82

The correlation between SPEM and EMEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPEM	EMEQ
Technology	32.7%	58.0%
Financial Services	19.9%	11.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.9%	6.2%
Industrials	8.3%	6.2%
Basic Materials	7.7%	1.6%
Communication Services	6.6%	5.5%
Healthcare	3.9%	1.0%
Energy	3.8%	7.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	2.7%
Utilities	2.7%	0.9%
Real Estate	1.8%	-

Return for Risk

SPEM vs. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPEM

SPEM Risk / Return Rank: 51
SPEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
SPEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
SPEM Omega Ratio Rank: 50
SPEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
SPEM Martin Ratio Rank: 54

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 91
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF (SPEM) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). 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.

	SPEM	EMEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	2.69	-1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.74	2.99	-1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.43	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	4.13	-2.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.31	15.08	-8.78

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the EMEQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPEM and EMEQ, 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

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPEM drawdown since its inception was -64.41%, which is greater than EMEQ's maximum drawdown of -26.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPEM and EMEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPEM	EMEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.41%	-26.25%	-38.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.36%	-26.25%	+14.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.14%	-20.86%	+16.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.66%	-4.67%	-9.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.43%	7.18%	-3.75%

Volatility

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF (SPEM) is 5.72%, while Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a volatility of 14.87%. This indicates that SPEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPEM	EMEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.72%	14.87%	-9.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.43%	37.54%	-22.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.70%	40.39%	-22.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.36%	34.15%	-16.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.80%	34.15%	-15.35%

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPEM has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

SPEM vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

SPEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.55%, more than EMEQ's 1.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.79%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SPEM SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF	2.55%	2.77%	2.78%	2.80%	3.38%	3.14%	1.92%	2.94%	2.34%	1.12%	1.51%	2.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPEM and EMEQ in my portfolio?

SPEM and EMEQ have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SPEM or EMEQ?

EMEQ has higher volatility (14.87%) compared to SPEM (5.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPEM dropped -64.41% vs EMEQ's -26.25%.

Which ETF is better, SPEM or EMEQ?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 110.88% vs 22.14% for SPEM. On fees, SPEM is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, SPEM has been the lower-risk option at 5.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPEM or EMEQ?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 110.88% return vs 22.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPEM or EMEQ?

SPEM is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SPEM or EMEQ?

SPEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.55%, compared with 1.79% for EMEQ.

What is the main difference between SPEM and EMEQ?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for SPEM and 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.23), 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.