EMF vs VOO
Templeton Emerging Markets Fund vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. EMF delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EMF | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.50% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $6,444.06 | $979.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.49% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 100 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +28.72% | +13.79% | |
| 1Y Return | +56.77% | +23.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +31.80% | +21.78% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.13% | +13.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 29.3% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -73.7% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 27, 1987 | Sep 7, 2010 |
EMF vs VOO Performance
Templeton Emerging Markets Fund (EMF) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EMF returned +56.77% while VOO returned +23.01%. Year to date, EMF is up 28.72% versus a gain of 13.79% for VOO.
Over three years, EMF compounded at +31.80% per year against +21.78% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +12.13% and +13.39% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.57% annualized vs +1.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.3% compared with 14.1% for VOO. 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 -73.7% for EMF and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.67. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMF charges 1.50% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $150 vs $3 annually, a gap of $147 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMF currently yields 6.49% against 1.09% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
EMF and VOO share 1 holdings out of 589 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EMF | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTSH | 0.88% | 0.03% | 0.85% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EMF or VOO?
EMF has an expense ratio of 1.50% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $147 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EMF or VOO?
Over the past year EMF returned +56.77% vs +23.01% for VOO, so EMF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), EMF annualized +1.76% vs +13.57% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EMF or VOO?
EMF has been the more volatile fund at 29.3% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: EMF -73.7% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both EMF and VOO?
EMF and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EMF and VOO?
EMF and VOO share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 589 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMF or VOO?
EMF yields 6.49% while VOO yields 1.09%, so EMF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.