AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE
AMED.DE (Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C)) and EXIA.DE (iShares DAX ESG UCITS ETF (DE)) are both Europe Equities funds - AMED.DE tracks the MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped while EXIA.DE tracks the DAX® ESG Target. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AMED.DE returned 10.41%/yr vs 8.95%/yr for EXIA.DE. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AMED.DE charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for EXIA.DE.
Performance
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMED.DE achieves a 16.87% return, which is significantly higher than EXIA.DE's 4.30% return.
AMED.DE
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 7.96%
- YTD
- 16.87%
- 6M
- 18.54%
- 1Y
- 26.45%
- 3Y*
- 16.11%
- 5Y*
- 10.41%
- 10Y*
- 9.75%
EXIA.DE
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 3.23%
- YTD
- 4.30%
- 6M
- 7.19%
- 1Y
- 3.51%
- 3Y*
- 15.53%
- 5Y*
- 8.95%
- 10Y*
- —
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AMED.DE Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) | 16.87% | 20.15% | 5.95% | 16.68% | -10.71% | 7.59% |
EXIA.DE iShares DAX ESG UCITS ETF (DE) | 4.30% | 17.20% | 18.59% | 21.57% | -14.54% | 4.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMED.DE and EXIA.DE is 0.81, 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 | 0.81 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2021 | 0.90 |
The correlation between AMED.DE and EXIA.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - 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
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE — Risk / Return Rank
AMED.DE
EXIA.DE
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) and iShares DAX ESG UCITS ETF (DE) (EXIA.DE). 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.
| AMED.DE | EXIA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.05 | +0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.49 | 0.30 | +2.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.40 | 0.86 | +8.55 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AMED.DE | EXIA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.74 | 0.22 | +1.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 | 0.52 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.57 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.55 | -0.08 |
Drawdowns
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMED.DE drawdown since its inception was -38.35%, which is greater than EXIA.DE's maximum drawdown of -28.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMED.DE and EXIA.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMED.DE | EXIA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.35% | -28.15% | -10.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.56% | -11.54% | +0.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.07% | -15.97% | +1.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.06% | -28.15% | +4.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.35% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.17% | -1.70% | +1.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.69% | -6.05% | -0.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.81% | 4.08% | -1.27% |
Volatility
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Volatility Comparison
Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) has a higher volatility of 5.61% compared to iShares DAX ESG UCITS ETF (DE) (EXIA.DE) at 4.76%. This indicates that AMED.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EXIA.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMED.DE | EXIA.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 4.76% | +0.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.64% | 12.64% | 0.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.19% | 16.12% | -0.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.87% | 16.98% | -1.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 16.92% | +0.08% |
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMED.DE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EXIA.DE's 0.12% 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
AMED.DE vs. EXIA.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither AMED.DE nor EXIA.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
AMED.DE and EXIA.DE have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EXIA.DE is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EXIA.DE is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMED.DE.
AMED.DE tracks MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped, while EXIA.DE tracks DAX® ESG Target. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for AMED.DE and 0.12% for EXIA.DE.
Find the right allocation for AMED.DE and EXIA.DE
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