PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AEME.L vs. 500G.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (AEME.L) and Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

AEME.L is traded in USD, while 500G.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the 500G.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AEME.L achieves a 26.36% return, which is significantly higher than 500G.L's 10.30% return.


AEME.L

1D
-1.56%
1M
5.74%
YTD
26.36%
6M
29.09%
1Y
53.12%
3Y*
24.01%
5Y*
7.32%
10Y*

500G.L

1D
0.01%
1M
4.63%
YTD
10.30%
6M
11.31%
1Y
27.98%
3Y*
22.19%
5Y*
13.84%
10Y*
15.40%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
AEME.L
Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)
26.36%34.94%6.72%8.41%-19.84%-9.55%
500G.L
Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc
10.30%17.70%25.32%26.22%-18.60%26.20%

Correlation

The correlation between AEME.L and 500G.L is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.58

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

0.56

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2021

0.58

The correlation between AEME.L and 500G.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

AEME.L vs. 500G.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AEME.L
AEME.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
AEME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AEME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
AEME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
AEME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
AEME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

500G.L
500G.L Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
500G.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
500G.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
500G.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
500G.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
500G.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (AEME.L) and Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.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.


AEME.L500G.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.45

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.91

3.14

+0.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.49

13.55

+0.94

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AEME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the 500G.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AEME.L and 500G.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


AEME.L500G.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.70

2.52

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.88

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.96

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

1.01

-0.64

Drawdowns

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AEME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.09%, which is greater than 500G.L's maximum drawdown of -33.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEME.L and 500G.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AEME.L500G.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.09%

-33.53%

-6.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.52%

-8.87%

-4.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.13%

-19.17%

+2.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.21%

-24.88%

-12.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.74%

-0.54%

-2.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.95%

-4.23%

-13.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.66%

2.06%

+1.60%

Volatility

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (AEME.L) has a higher volatility of 8.57% compared to Amundi S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF USD Acc (500G.L) at 2.59%. This indicates that AEME.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than 500G.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AEME.L500G.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.57%

2.59%

+5.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.83%

7.97%

+8.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.59%

11.05%

+8.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.72%

15.65%

+3.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.71%

16.13%

+2.58%

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AEME.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than 500G.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

AEME.L vs. 500G.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AEME.L nor 500G.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


AEME.L and 500G.L have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, 500G.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

500G.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for AEME.L.

AEME.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while 500G.L is S&P 500. AEME.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while 500G.L tracks S&P 500. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AEME.L and 0.15% for 500G.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AEME.L and 500G.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