PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AASG.L vs. MEUD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets Asia UCITS ETF USD (AASG.L) and Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AASG.L achieves a 32.89% return, which is significantly higher than MEUD.L's 5.97% return. Over the past 10 years, AASG.L has outperformed MEUD.L with an annualized return of 12.54%, while MEUD.L has yielded a comparatively lower 10.34% annualized return.


AASG.L

1D
-0.95%
1M
13.19%
YTD
32.89%
6M
35.83%
1Y
64.11%
3Y*
23.54%
5Y*
9.38%
10Y*
12.54%

MEUD.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
1.97%
YTD
5.97%
6M
8.66%
1Y
19.47%
3Y*
13.74%
5Y*
9.76%
10Y*
10.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
AASG.L
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets Asia UCITS ETF USD
32.89%23.83%14.04%0.69%-11.51%-4.50%24.04%14.10%-10.84%30.20%
MEUD.L
Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc
5.97%26.51%3.65%13.48%-5.04%17.06%3.85%20.40%-9.59%15.43%

Correlation

The correlation between AASG.L and MEUD.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.45

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.52

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016

0.63

The correlation between AASG.L and MEUD.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AASG.L
MEUD.L

Technology

44.9%
9.4%

Financial Services

14.8%
24.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
6.9%

Industrials

7.8%
20.1%

Communication Services

7.1%
3.1%

Basic Materials

3.9%
5.0%

Healthcare

3.2%
12.7%

Energy

2.9%
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
7.7%

Utilities

1.5%
4.5%

Real Estate

0.7%
1.2%

Technology

AASG.L
44.9%
MEUD.L
9.4%

Financial Services

AASG.L
14.8%
MEUD.L
24.0%

Consumer Cyclical

AASG.L
10.6%
MEUD.L
6.9%

Industrials

AASG.L
7.8%
MEUD.L
20.1%

Communication Services

AASG.L
7.1%
MEUD.L
3.1%

Basic Materials

AASG.L
3.9%
MEUD.L
5.0%

Healthcare

AASG.L
3.2%
MEUD.L
12.7%

Energy

AASG.L
2.9%
MEUD.L
5.5%

Consumer Defensive

AASG.L
2.5%
MEUD.L
7.7%

Utilities

AASG.L
1.5%
MEUD.L
4.5%

Real Estate

AASG.L
0.7%
MEUD.L
1.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AASG.L
AASG.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
AASG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AASG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
AASG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
AASG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
AASG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

MEUD.L
MEUD.L Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
MEUD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
MEUD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets Asia UCITS ETF USD (AASG.L) and Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


AASG.LMEUD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.90

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

1.30

+0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.56

1.84

+3.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.24

6.68

+12.56

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AASG.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.50, which is higher than the MEUD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AASG.L and MEUD.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AASG.LMEUD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.50

1.60

+1.90

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.70

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.68

0.69

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.69

0.59

+0.10

Drawdowns

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AASG.L drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, which is greater than MEUD.L's maximum drawdown of -28.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AASG.L and MEUD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AASG.LMEUD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.12%

-28.57%

-5.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.46%

-10.53%

-0.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.56%

-12.61%

-4.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.57%

-17.09%

-11.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.12%

-28.57%

-5.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.95%

-1.90%

+0.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.03%

-4.17%

-6.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.32%

2.91%

+0.41%

Volatility

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets Asia UCITS ETF USD (AASG.L) has a higher volatility of 8.31% compared to Lyxor Core STOXX Europe 600 (DR) - UCITS ETF Acc (MEUD.L) at 4.20%. This indicates that AASG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MEUD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AASG.LMEUD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.31%

4.20%

+4.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.42%

10.19%

+5.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.24%

12.13%

+6.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.68%

13.94%

+3.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.55%

14.92%

+3.63%

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AASG.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than MEUD.L's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

AASG.L vs. MEUD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AASG.L nor MEUD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


AASG.L and MEUD.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MEUD.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MEUD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for AASG.L.

AASG.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while MEUD.L is Europe Equities. AASG.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while MEUD.L tracks MSCI Europe NR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AASG.L and 0.15% for MEUD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AASG.L and MEUD.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer