Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

EMXC vs EWY: how they differ

EMXC and EWY hold 26% of their weight in the same names, and EWY returned more over the year.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF and iShares MSCI South Korea ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, EMXC and EWY hold 26% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions EMXC and EWY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingEMXCEWY
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LTD9.26%22.13%
SK HYNIX7.53%24.02%
SK SQUARE0.77%3.01%
SAMSUNG ELECTRO MECHANICS LTD0.58%2.46%
KB FINANCIAL GROUP0.43%1.92%
HYUNDAI MOTOR0.38%1.60%
SHINHAN FINANCIAL GROUP0.34%1.57%
DOOSAN ENERBILITY LTD0.30%1.35%
HANA FINANCIAL GROUP0.27%1.31%
HANWHA AEROSPACE LTD0.26%1.23%
SAMSUNG SDI LTD0.25%1.21%
SAMSUNG C&T CORP0.23%1.14%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in EMXCOnly in EWY
TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING 18.85%KRW CASH 2.49%
MEDIATEK 2.12%ETD KRW BALANCE WITH R93546 0.30%
DELTA ELECTRONICS 1.02%HLB LTD 0.03%
HON HAI PRECISION INDUSTRY 0.96%SAMSUNG EPIS HOLDINGS LTD 0.03%
HDFC BANK 0.81%ECOPRO BM CO LTD 0.01%
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD 0.76%
ICICI BANK 0.75%
ASE TECHNOLOGY HOLDING 0.68%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

EMXC and EWY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF
EWY
iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isMSCI Emerging Markets ex ChinaMSCI South Korea
Total return, 1 year+55.5%+147.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+38.0 pts+130.4 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.59%
Already in the S&P 5000.0%0.0%
Holdings59780

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 Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 597 positions, with the top ten at 43.3%. It sat 5.5% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

EWY in plain words

EWY is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI South Korea. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +147.9% 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 Sep 10, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 80 positions, with the top ten at 61.9%. It sat 13.9% below its high of Jun 18, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, EMXC or EWY?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, EMXC returned +55.5% and EWY returned +147.9%, so EWY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, EMXC or EWY?
EMXC charges 0.25% a year and EWY charges 0.59%, so EMXC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do EMXC and EWY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of EMXC and 0% of EWY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 26% 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 EWY, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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 EWY, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/emxc-vs-ewy Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources