PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
AEMD.L vs. UC79.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AEMD.L (Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)) and UC79.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from Amundi and UBS respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AEMD.L returned 5.91%/yr vs 10.24%/yr for UC79.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AEMD.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for UC79.L.

Performance

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AEMD.L achieves a 26.52% return, which is significantly lower than UC79.L's 33.24% return.

AEMD.L

1D
-1.67%
1M
4.11%
YTD
26.52%
6M
24.48%
1Y
50.35%
3Y*
18.11%
5Y*
5.91%
10Y*
—

UC79.L

1D
-1.64%
1M
6.69%
YTD
33.24%
6M
34.04%
1Y
63.25%
3Y*
24.35%
5Y*
10.24%
10Y*
10.59%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
AEMD.L
Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)		26.52%23.45%6.02%0.02%-13.08%-4.36%12.63%6.68%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		33.24%26.95%10.88%1.14%-11.74%0.32%13.27%6.87%

Correlation

The correlation between AEMD.L and UC79.L is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.93

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

0.94

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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2019

0.93

The correlation between AEMD.L and UC79.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
AEMD.L
UC79.L

Technology

41.4%
38.0%

Financial Services

18.2%
22.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.0%
11.0%

Industrials

7.0%
8.3%

Communication Services

6.4%
8.0%

Basic Materials

6.0%
3.3%

Energy

3.7%
0.2%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
2.8%

Healthcare

2.7%
3.6%

Utilities

2.0%
1.0%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.3%

Technology

AEMD.L
41.4%
UC79.L
38.0%

Financial Services

AEMD.L
18.2%
UC79.L
22.6%

Consumer Cyclical

AEMD.L
9.0%
UC79.L
11.0%

Industrials

AEMD.L
7.0%
UC79.L
8.3%

Communication Services

AEMD.L
6.4%
UC79.L
8.0%

Basic Materials

AEMD.L
6.0%
UC79.L
3.3%

Energy

AEMD.L
3.7%
UC79.L
0.2%

Consumer Defensive

AEMD.L
2.8%
UC79.L
2.8%

Healthcare

AEMD.L
2.7%
UC79.L
3.6%

Utilities

AEMD.L
2.0%
UC79.L
1.0%

Real Estate

AEMD.L
1.0%
UC79.L
1.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis

Often compared with AEMD.L:
AEMD.L vs. DFEVXAEMD.L vs. BNKE.LAEMD.L vs. ACWL.LAEMD.L vs. ANXU.LAEMD.L vs. 500G.LAEMD.L vs. 500U.LAEMD.L vs. CSH2.L
Often compared with UC79.L:
UC79.L vs. HMEF.LUC79.L vs. EMV.LUC79.L vs. COPPUC79.L vs. V3AB.LUC79.L vs. HDEM.LUC79.L vs. EUFM.LUC79.L vs. 5ESG.L

Return for Risk

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
AEMD.L
AEMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
AEMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AEMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
AEMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
AEMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
AEMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
UC79.L
UC79.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
UC79.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UC79.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
UC79.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
UC79.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
UC79.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
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.

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.L) and UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.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.

AEMD.LUC79.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.01
1.44

+1.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.86
2.27

+1.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.57

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.51

2.48

+2.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.32

4.47

+10.85

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AEMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is higher than the UC79.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AEMD.L and UC79.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

AEMD.LUC79.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01

1.44

+1.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.36

0.41

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.42

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.15

+0.26

Drawdowns

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AEMD.L drawdown since its inception was -29.09%, smaller than the maximum UC79.L drawdown of -53.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEMD.L and UC79.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

AEMD.LUC79.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.09%

-53.04%

+23.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.38%

-25.91%

+14.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.09%

-25.91%

+8.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.56%

-25.91%

+0.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-39.46%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.46%

-2.45%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.65%

-21.80%

+8.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.36%

14.42%

-11.06%

Volatility

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.L) is 7.48%, while UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L) has a volatility of 8.44%. This indicates that AEMD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UC79.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

AEMD.LUC79.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.48%

8.44%

-0.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.63%

15.21%

-0.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.06%

44.59%

-27.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.40%

24.99%

-8.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.39%

25.01%

-6.62%

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AEMD.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than UC79.L's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AEMD.L vs. UC79.L - Dividend Comparison

AEMD.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UC79.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.59%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AEMD.L
Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		1.59%2.14%1.79%2.38%2.06%1.35%1.81%2.11%2.11%1.97%2.15%1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.93, AEMD.L and UC79.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, AEMD.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

AEMD.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for UC79.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AEMD.L and 0.27% for UC79.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AEMD.L and UC79.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