EMSF vs VTI
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EMSF delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EMSF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $43M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.30% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 60 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +32.66% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | +46.37% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.96% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -24.8% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Matthews Asia Funds | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 21, 2023 | May 24, 2001 |
EMSF vs VTI Performance
Matthews Emerging Markets Sustainable Future Active ETF (EMSF) is a ETF from Matthews Asia Funds and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EMSF returned +46.37% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, EMSF is up 32.66% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, EMSF compounded at +17.96% per year against +21.17% for VTI. Across the full 3-year window we track, EMSF has the edge at +17.96% annualized vs +8.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMSF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.6% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -24.8% for EMSF and -56.6% for VTI. 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 0.57. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMSF charges 0.79% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $3 annually, a gap of $76 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMSF currently yields 1.30% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EMSF or VTI?
EMSF has an expense ratio of 0.79% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $76 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EMSF or VTI?
Over the past year EMSF returned +46.37% vs +23.31% for VTI, so EMSF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), EMSF annualized +17.96% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EMSF or VTI?
EMSF has been the more volatile fund at 22.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: EMSF -24.8% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both EMSF and VTI?
EMSF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EMSF and VTI?
EMSF and VTI share 2 common holdings with a 2.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2835 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMSF or VTI?
EMSF yields 1.30% while VTI yields 1.07%, so EMSF 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.