XCNY vs. EMSF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XCNY (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and EMSF (Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. XCNY is passively managed, while EMSF is actively managed. Over the past year, XCNY returned 28.31% vs 42.52% for EMSF. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XCNY charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EMSF.

Performance

XCNY vs. EMSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCNY achieves a 15.72% return, which is significantly lower than EMSF's 30.73% return.

XCNY

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: -2.62%
• 6M: 10.07%
• YTD: 15.72%
• 1Y: 28.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.79%

EMSF

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: -8.36%
• 6M: 17.49%
• YTD: 30.73%
• 1Y: 42.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.92%

*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)
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	$80.02K	$93.23K	$184.42K
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	$13.05K	$15.72K	$16.80K

XCNY vs. EMSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	15.72%	20.42%	-3.63%
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	30.73%	19.20%	-2.26%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNY and EMSF is 0.89, 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.	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.82

The correlation between XCNY and EMSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCNY vs. EMSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCNY	EMSF
Technology	39.5%	52.8%
Financial Services	21.5%	15.0%
Basic Materials	7.9%	-
Industrials	7.6%	11.0%
Consumer Cyclical	5.3%	6.3%
Energy	4.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	3.6%
Communication Services	3.3%	1.7%
Utilities	3.0%	2.1%
Healthcare	2.6%	6.0%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.6%

Return for Risk

XCNY vs. EMSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCNY

XCNY Risk / Return Rank: 65
XCNY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
XCNY Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
XCNY Omega Ratio Rank: 64
XCNY Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
XCNY Martin Ratio Rank: 66

EMSF

EMSF Risk / Return Rank: 57
EMSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EMSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMSF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EMSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EMSF Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

XCNY vs. EMSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) and Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF). 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.

	XCNY	EMSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	1.36	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	1.86	+0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.25	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.40	2.10	+0.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.99	7.05	+0.94

XCNY vs. EMSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNY Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is comparable to the EMSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNY and EMSF, 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

XCNY vs. EMSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNY drawdown since its inception was -19.70%, smaller than the maximum EMSF drawdown of -24.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNY and EMSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCNY	EMSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.70%	-24.75%	+5.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.86%	-19.49%	+7.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.26%	-15.62%	+9.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.14%	-5.91%	+1.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.56%	5.80%	-2.24%

Volatility

XCNY vs. EMSF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) is 6.99%, while Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) has a volatility of 10.79%. This indicates that XCNY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCNY	EMSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	10.79%	-3.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.56%	26.54%	-8.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.13%	30.10%	-10.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.65%	24.40%	-5.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.65%	24.40%	-5.75%

XCNY vs. EMSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCNY has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EMSF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCNY vs. EMSF - Dividend Comparison

XCNY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, more than EMSF's 1.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMSF Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF	1.44%	1.88%	3.29%	0.02%
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	2.31%	2.68%	1.07%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCNY and EMSF in my portfolio?

XCNY and EMSF have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XCNY or EMSF?

EMSF has higher volatility (10.79%) compared to XCNY (6.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCNY dropped -19.70% vs EMSF's -24.75%.

Which ETF is better, XCNY or EMSF?

On 1-year performance, EMSF leads with 42.52% vs 28.31% for XCNY. On fees, XCNY is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XCNY has been the lower-risk option at 6.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCNY or EMSF?

Over the 1-year period, EMSF has performed better with a 42.52% return vs 28.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCNY or EMSF?

XCNY is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for EMSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XCNY or EMSF?

XCNY has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 1.44% for EMSF.

What is the main difference between XCNY and EMSF?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Matthews. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XCNY and 0.79% for EMSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCNY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 1.36), 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.