Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

EMXC vs EWT: how they differ

EMXC and EWT hold 33% of their weight in the same names, and EWT returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF and iShares MSCI Taiwan ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, EMXC and EWT hold 33% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions EMXC and EWT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingEMXCEWT
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa17.97%19.35%
MediaTek Inc.2.04%7.56%
DELTA ELECTRONICS, INC.1.47%5.64%
HON HAI PRECISION INDUSTRY CO., LTD.1.13%4.09%
ASE Technology Holding Co., Ltd.0.62%2.86%
United Microelectronics Corporation0.50%2.25%
ELITE MATERIAL CO., LTD.0.48%2.75%
UNIMICRON TECHNOLOGY CORP.0.43%2.73%
ACCTON TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION0.38%2.21%
YAGEO CORPORATION0.38%2.15%
CTBC Financial Holding Co., Ltd.0.32%1.46%
CHROMA ATE INC.0.30%1.52%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in EMXCOnly in EWT
SK hynix Inc. 8.37%YA HSIN INDUSTRIAL CO LTD 0.00%
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 1.07%
HDFC BANK LIMITED 0.88%
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED 0.83%
SAMSUNG ELECTRO-MECHANICS CO.,LTD 0.78%
SK Square Co., Ltd. 0.75%
ICICI BANK LIMITED 0.69%
HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY 0.63%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated May 31, 2026.

EMXC and EWT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
EWT
iShares MSCI Taiwan ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI Emerging Markets ex ChinaMSCI Taiwan
Total return, 1 year+55.5%+84.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+38.0 pts+67.4 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.59%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings66285

EMXC in plain words

EMXC is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +55.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 662 positions, with the top ten at 44.3%. It sat 5.5% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

EWT in plain words

EWT is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI Taiwan. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +84.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.59% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 85 positions, with the top ten at 51.6%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, EMXC or EWT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EMXC returned +55.5% and EWT returned +84.9%, so EWT returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, EMXC or EWT?
EMXC charges 0.25% a year and EWT charges 0.59%, so EMXC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do EMXC and EWT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of EMXC and 0% of EWT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 33% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

EMXC against EWT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, EMXC against EWT, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/EMXC-EWT Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources