AEME.L vs. EMXC.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AEME.L (Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) and EMXC.L (Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from Amundi tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AEME.L returned 7.32%/yr vs 11.52%/yr for EMXC.L. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AEME.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for EMXC.L.

Performance

AEME.L vs. EMXC.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 Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

AEME.L is traded in USD, while EMXC.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the EMXC.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 lower than EMXC.L's 36.35% 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*: —

EMXC.L

• 1D: -1.67%
• 1M: 6.79%
• YTD: 36.35%
• 6M: 43.13%
• 1Y: 74.42%
• 3Y*: 32.03%
• 5Y*: 11.52%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
AEME.L Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	26.36%	34.94%	6.72%	8.41%	-19.84%	-9.55%
EMXC.L Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc	36.35%	53.41%	-3.24%	22.38%	-23.27%	-1.80%

Correlation

The correlation between AEME.L and EMXC.L is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2021	0.85

The correlation between AEME.L and EMXC.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AEME.L	EMXC.L
Technology	43.0%	45.0%
Financial Services	17.9%	19.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	4.5%
Industrials	6.8%	8.3%
Communication Services	6.2%	3.4%
Basic Materials	5.9%	6.9%
Energy	3.5%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.7%	2.9%
Healthcare	2.6%	2.2%
Utilities	1.9%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.0%	0.9%

Return for Risk

AEME.L vs. EMXC.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: 80
AEME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
AEME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
AEME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AEME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
AEME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 77

EMXC.L

EMXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EMXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EMXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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. EMXC.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 Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.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.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	3.06	-0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.57	3.78	-0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.52	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.91	4.44	-0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.49	16.94	-2.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AEME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AEME.L and EMXC.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AEME.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.70	3.06	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.39	0.53	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.59	-0.22

Drawdowns

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AEME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.09%, smaller than the maximum EMXC.L drawdown of -42.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AEME.L and EMXC.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AEME.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.09%	-42.58%	+2.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.52%	-16.67%	+3.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.13%	-21.97%	+4.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.21%	-42.18%	+4.97%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.74%	-2.99%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.95%	-13.12%	-4.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	4.38%	-0.72%

Volatility

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (AEME.L) is 8.57%, while Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L) has a volatility of 10.32%. This indicates that AEME.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AEME.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.57%	10.32%	-1.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.83%	21.19%	-4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.59%	24.25%	-4.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.72%	21.70%	-2.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.71%	23.65%	-4.94%

AEME.L vs. EMXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AEME.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC.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. EMXC.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AEME.L nor EMXC.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AEME.L and EMXC.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, AEME.L and EMXC.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.

Which ETF is better, AEME.L or EMXC.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, AEME.L or EMXC.L?

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

What is the main difference between AEME.L and EMXC.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AEME.L and 0.15% for EMXC.L.