EEM vs RWEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF vs Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
Which is better, EEM or RWEM?
RWEM has been ahead.
RWEM has a lower expense ratio. RWEM led over 1Y. RWEM is less concentrated, with 35.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.4%.
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 | EEM | RWEM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.72% | 0.52%Best |
| AUM | $30.4B | $71M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.67% | 1.77% |
| Holdings | 1,224 | 450 |
| YTD Return | +15.09% | +15.92%Best |
| 1Y Return | +23.94% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.98% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.13% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 39.4% | 35.9%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | The Advisors Inner Circle Fund |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 7, 2003 | Dec 15, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
EEM vs RWEM growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
EEM vs RWEM Performance
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) is an ETF from The Advisors Inner Circle Fund. Year to date, EEM is up 15.09% versus a gain of 15.92% for RWEM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EEM charges 0.72% per year while RWEM charges 0.52%. On a $10,000 position that is $72 vs $52 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EEM currently yields 1.67% against 1.77% for RWEM.
Holdings Overlap
33.5% of EEM's money is in holdings RWEM also owns. 59.2% of RWEM's money is in holdings EEM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
129 positions in common, counted across the 1,162 positions we hold weights for in EEM and 223 in RWEM, against full books of 1,224 and 450.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EEM | Weight in RWEM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2330:TWTsmc | 15.69% | 9.30% | 6.39% |
| 000660:KRSk Hynix Inc Common Stock KRW 5000 | 6.03% | 4.62% | 1.41% |
| 2454:TWMediaTek Inc ORD TWD10 | 1.82% | 2.57% | 0.75% |
| 2308:TWDelta Electronics Inc | 0.94% | 2.86% | 1.92% |
| 2357:TWAsustek Computer Inc | 0.16% | 1.58% | 1.42% |
| 402340:KRSk Square | 0.64% | 1.01% | 0.37% |
| 2602:SHOnewo Inc | 0.01% | 1.62% | 1.61% |
| 316140:KRWoori Financial Group Inc | 0.13% | 1.23% | 1.10% |
| 2345:TWAccton Technology Corp | 0.24% | 1.11% | 0.87% |
| 5274:TWAspeed Technology Inc | 0.16% | 0.90% | 0.74% |
59.2% of RWEM is already inside EEM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EEM or RWEM?
EEM has an expense ratio of 0.72% while RWEM charges 0.52%. RWEM is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between EEM and RWEM?
59.2% of RWEM's money is in holdings EEM also owns. 59.2% of RWEM's is in holdings EEM also owns. They hold 129 positions in common, counted across the 1,162 positions we hold weights for in EEM and 223 in RWEM.
Which pays a higher dividend, EEM or RWEM?
EEM yields 1.67% while RWEM yields 1.77%, so RWEM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RWEM better than EEM?
RWEM has a lower expense ratio. RWEM led over 1Y. RWEM is less concentrated, with 35.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.