VEA vs. EMEQ

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

VEA (Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF) and EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VEA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap ex US Index, while EMEQ is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Nomura. VEA is passively managed, while EMEQ is actively managed. Over the past year, VEA returned 32.96% vs 153.11% for EMEQ. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VEA charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for EMEQ.

Performance

VEA vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) 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, VEA achieves a 16.08% return, which is significantly lower than EMEQ's 78.37% return.

VEA

• 1D: 1.17%
• 1M: 4.79%
• YTD: 16.08%
• 6M: 17.35%
• 1Y: 32.96%
• 3Y*: 19.14%
• 5Y*: 9.87%
• 10Y*: 10.67%

EMEQ

• 1D: 4.84%
• 1M: 15.54%
• YTD: 78.37%
• 6M: 90.73%
• 1Y: 153.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

VEA vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF	16.08%	35.16%	-5.16%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	78.37%	69.78%	-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between VEA and EMEQ is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.71

The correlation between VEA and EMEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

VEA vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VEA	EMEQ
Financial Services	23.3%	6.8%
Industrials	19.2%	0.3%
Technology	13.8%	1.1%
Healthcare	8.2%	1.4%
Basic Materials	7.5%	1.3%
Consumer Cyclical	7.5%	6.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.6%	3.8%
Energy	5.4%	1.3%
Communication Services	3.4%	2.4%
Utilities	3.3%	0.9%
Real Estate	2.7%	-

Return for Risk

VEA vs. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

VEA

VEA Risk / Return Rank: 67
VEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
VEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
VEA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
VEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
VEA Martin Ratio Rank: 66

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 96
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

VEA vs. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) 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.

	VEA	EMEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	4.32	-2.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	4.33	-1.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.66	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.85	8.60	-5.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.96	32.09	-21.13

VEA vs. EMEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VEA Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is lower than the EMEQ Sharpe Ratio of 4.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VEA 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

VEA vs. EMEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VEA drawdown since its inception was -60.68%, which is greater than EMEQ's maximum drawdown of -19.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VEA and EMEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	VEA	EMEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.68%	-19.99%	-40.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.63%	-17.91%	+6.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.71%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.12%	+1.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.27%	-4.04%	-9.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.01%	4.79%	-1.78%

Volatility

VEA vs. EMEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) is 6.92%, while Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a volatility of 19.86%. This indicates that VEA 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

	VEA	EMEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.92%	19.86%	-12.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.42%	32.72%	-18.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.58%	35.77%	-19.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.73%	32.02%	-15.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.41%	32.02%	-14.61%

VEA vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

VEA has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

VEA vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

VEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, more than EMEQ's 1.55% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.55%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VEA Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF	2.59%	3.22%	3.35%	3.15%	2.91%	3.16%	2.04%	3.04%	3.35%	2.77%	3.05%	2.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VEA and EMEQ in my portfolio?

VEA and EMEQ have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VEA or EMEQ?

EMEQ has higher volatility (19.86%) compared to VEA (6.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VEA dropped -60.68% vs EMEQ's -19.99%.

Which ETF is better, VEA or EMEQ?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 153.11% vs 32.96% for VEA. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VEA has been the lower-risk option at 6.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VEA or EMEQ?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 153.11% return vs 32.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VEA or EMEQ?

VEA is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

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

VEA has the higher dividend yield at 2.59%, compared with 1.55% for EMEQ.

What is the main difference between VEA and EMEQ?

VEA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while EMEQ is Emerging Markets Diversified. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for VEA and 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.32 vs 2.00), 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.