Late last year, I theorized that if dividends are the thing at WisdomTree, wouldn't the high-yielding versions of these funds, such as DEM in this case, have to be the best performers? And if so, what is the point of the others?

Perhaps this is the impetus to just go with DEM for now. To be clear, this is just supposition on my part.

Let the Comparisons Begin

DEM will be compared to the ever-increasing number of other broad-based emerging-market funds, which include iShares MSCI Emerging-Markets Fund (EEM - commentary - Cramer's Take), the Vanguard Emerging-Market ETF (VWO - commentary - Cramer's Take), the BLDRs Emerging-Market ADR 50 (ADRE - commentary - Cramer's Take) and the SPDR S&P Emerging Market (GMM - commentary - Cramer's Take).

The obvious point of differentiation will be the yield, which appears to be targeted at 5.48% (the yield of the index minus the expense fee; 6.11-0.63). EEM yields 1.14%, VWO yields 1.40%, ADRE yields 3.25%, and GMM looks like it will yield 1.53% (it is still very new and has not gone through a full dividend cycle).

Another point of differentiation is that DEM is relatively light on financials at 13.5%, but it is heavy on materials at 20.5% and telecom and energy at 17% each; those are the three biggest sectors. DEM also has a much smaller average market cap at $5 billion, compared with $35 billion for ADRE, $20 billion for EEM and $11 billion for GMM (the figure was not available for VWO).

DEM's selection process gives it a larger weighting in some of the more exotic emerging markets, such as Thailand, at 8.23%, and Malaysia, at 6.95%. These countries are very high-yielding, as evidenced by their respective weights, but this weighting creates visibility for a bumpier ride the next time there is a crisis in Asia.

WisdomTree has back-tested this fund for a 10-year period against the MSCI Emerging Market Index and, not surprisingly, the results are impressive.

Back-Test vs. MSCI Emerging-Market Index

Click here for larger image.