EMCS vs RFEM
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Select ETF vs First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF
Which is better, EMCS or RFEM?
Each has led over a different period.
EMCS has a lower expense ratio. EMCS led over the full window, RFEM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EMCS | RFEM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.99% |
| AUM | $1.0B | $84M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.53% | 2.51% |
| Holdings | 148 | 119 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.1% | 17.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.9% | -36.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 7.8 years | $21,696Best | $21,196 |
| Fund Family | Xtrackers ETFs | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2018 | Jun 14, 2016 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
The two price series end 56 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. EMCS has data through Nov 6, 2026 and RFEM through Sep 11, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 7.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 6, 2018 to Sep 11, 2026 (7.8 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMCS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.1% compared with 17.5% for RFEM. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -44.9% for EMCS and -36.0% for RFEM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMCS charges 0.15% per year while RFEM charges 0.99%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $99 annually, a gap of $84 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMCS currently yields 1.53% against 2.51% for RFEM.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of EMCS and RFEM you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EMCS or RFEM?
EMCS has an expense ratio of 0.15% while RFEM charges 0.99%. EMCS is the cheaper option, by $84 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, EMCS or RFEM?
EMCS has been the more volatile fund at 19.1% annualized versus 17.5% for RFEM. Worst drawdown: EMCS -44.9% vs RFEM -36.0%.
Should I hold both EMCS and RFEM?
EMCS and RFEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMCS or RFEM?
EMCS yields 1.53% while RFEM yields 2.51%, so RFEM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RFEM better than EMCS?
EMCS has a lower expense ratio. EMCS led over the full window, RFEM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.