FMN vs MFEM
Federated Hermes Premier Municipal Income Fund vs PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
Quick Verdict
MFEM has a lower expense ratio. MFEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. MFEM offers more diversification with 701 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FMN | MFEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.49% | |
| AUM | $16M | $156M | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.43% | 2.39% | |
| Holdings | 150 | 701 | |
| YTD Return | +2.58% | +21.04% | |
| 1Y Return | +9.22% | +33.03% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.39% | +20.26% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.02% | +9.18% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.7% | 17.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -53.4% | -45.3% | |
| Fund Family | Federated Hermes | PIMCO (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 20, 2002 | Aug 31, 2017 |
FMN vs MFEM Performance
Federated Hermes Premier Municipal Income Fund (FMN) is a ETF from Federated Hermes and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) is a ETF from PIMCO (US). Over the past year FMN returned +9.22% while MFEM returned +33.03%. Year to date, FMN is up 2.58% versus a gain of 21.04% for MFEM.
Over three years, FMN compounded at +7.39% per year against +20.26% for MFEM; over five years the annualized figures are -3.02% and +9.18% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, MFEM has the edge at +6.77% annualized vs -0.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MFEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.7% compared with 14.7% for FMN. 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 -53.4% for FMN and -45.3% for MFEM. 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 0.58. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FMN charges 0.75% per year while MFEM charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $49 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FMN currently yields 4.43% against 2.39% for MFEM.
Holdings Overlap
FMN and MFEM share 0 holdings out of 588 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FMN or MFEM?
FMN has an expense ratio of 0.75% while MFEM charges 0.49%. MFEM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $26 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FMN or MFEM?
Over the past year FMN returned +9.22% vs +33.03% for MFEM, so MFEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FMN annualized -0.25% vs +6.77% for MFEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FMN or MFEM?
MFEM has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 14.7% for FMN. Worst drawdown: FMN -53.4% vs MFEM -45.3%.
Should I hold both FMN and MFEM?
FMN and MFEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FMN and MFEM?
FMN and MFEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 588 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FMN or MFEM?
FMN yields 4.43% while MFEM yields 2.39%, so FMN 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.