BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L
BRIC.L (iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP) and FEMD.L (Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - BRIC.L tracks the FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index while FEMD.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BRIC.L returned -6.66%/yr vs 9.70%/yr for FEMD.L. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BRIC.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEMD.L.
Performance
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
BRIC.L is traded in GBp, while FEMD.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FEMD.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BRIC.L achieves a -9.11% return, which is significantly lower than FEMD.L's 35.14% return.
BRIC.L
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- -4.88%
- YTD
- -9.11%
- 6M
- -12.88%
- 1Y
- -1.80%
- 3Y*
- 6.39%
- 5Y*
- -6.66%
- 10Y*
- 3.77%
FEMD.L
- 1D
- -1.83%
- 1M
- 9.78%
- YTD
- 35.14%
- 6M
- 34.17%
- 1Y
- 56.67%
- 3Y*
- 23.39%
- 5Y*
- 9.70%
- 10Y*
- —
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BRIC.L iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP | -9.11% | 20.80% | 15.70% | -12.64% | -20.29% | -23.12% | 15.97% | 3.93% |
FEMD.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF | 35.14% | 20.67% | 6.74% | 9.89% | -15.51% | 6.86% | 9.56% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between BRIC.L and FEMD.L is 0.52, 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 | 0.52 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 12, 2019 | 0.73 |
Over the past year, the correlation between BRIC.L and FEMD.L has dropped to 0.52 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Consumer Cyclical
Financial Services
Communication Services
Energy
Technology
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Real Estate
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Financial Services
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Communication Services
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Energy
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Technology
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Basic Materials
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Healthcare
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Real Estate
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Consumer Defensive
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Industrials
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
Utilities
BRIC.L
-
FEMD.L
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
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L — Risk / Return Rank
BRIC.L
FEMD.L
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.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.
| BRIC.L | FEMD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.66 | -0.66 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 6.42 | -6.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.14 | 21.27 | -21.42 |
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
| BRIC.L | FEMD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.07 | 3.55 | -3.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.23 | 0.64 | -0.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.15 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.58 | -0.46 |
Drawdowns
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BRIC.L drawdown since its inception was -63.13%, which is greater than FEMD.L's maximum drawdown of -27.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRIC.L and FEMD.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BRIC.L | FEMD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.13% | -27.55% | -35.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.84% | -8.95% | -9.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.78% | -14.43% | -8.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -52.50% | -25.26% | -27.24% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -59.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -41.46% | -4.02% | -37.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.86% | -8.25% | -13.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.59% | 2.70% | +5.89% |
Volatility
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) is 7.20%, while Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.L) has a volatility of 8.69%. This indicates that BRIC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEMD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BRIC.L | FEMD.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.20% | 8.69% | -1.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.09% | 13.99% | -0.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.29% | 16.19% | +2.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.81% | 15.06% | +13.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.45% | 17.70% | +7.75% |
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
BRIC.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FEMD.L's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
BRIC.L vs. FEMD.L - Dividend Comparison
BRIC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, less than FEMD.L's 2.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BRIC.L iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP | 1.61% | 1.76% | 2.77% | 2.67% | 3.63% | 1.60% | 1.49% | 2.07% | 2.95% | 1.99% | 1.86% | 2.62% |
FEMD.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF | 2.73% | 3.48% | 3.76% | 3.69% | 3.99% | 3.27% | 2.62% | 0.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BRIC.L and FEMD.L have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FEMD.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FEMD.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for BRIC.L.
BRIC.L tracks FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index, while FEMD.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for BRIC.L and 0.50% for FEMD.L.
Find the right allocation for BRIC.L and FEMD.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