BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BRIC.L (iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP) and FEMQ.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 FEMQ.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BRIC.L returned -6.66%/yr vs 9.81%/yr for FEMQ.L. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BRIC.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEMQ.L.

Performance

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP (BRIC.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BRIC.L is traded in GBp, while FEMQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FEMQ.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 FEMQ.L's 34.78% return.

BRIC.L

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: -3.58%
• YTD: -9.11%
• 6M: -12.14%
• 1Y: -1.24%
• 3Y*: 6.39%
• 5Y*: -6.66%
• 10Y*: 3.77%

FEMQ.L

• 1D: -1.83%
• 1M: 9.21%
• YTD: 34.78%
• 6M: 34.02%
• 1Y: 56.10%
• 3Y*: 23.41%
• 5Y*: 9.81%
• 10Y*: —

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

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BRIC.L iShares BIC 50 UCITS ETF (Dist) GBP	-9.11%	20.80%	15.70%	-12.64%	-20.29%	-23.12%	15.97%	17.97%	-3.04%	2.47%
FEMQ.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF	34.78%	20.96%	6.49%	9.64%	-15.02%	7.70%	9.31%	13.76%	-9.24%	2.50%

Correlation

The correlation between BRIC.L and FEMQ.L is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2017	0.77

Over the past year, the correlation between BRIC.L and FEMQ.L has dropped to 0.54 - well below their long-term average of 0.77, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BRIC.L	FEMQ.L
Consumer Cyclical	31.8%	9.6%
Financial Services	26.2%	16.6%
Communication Services	18.2%	2.3%
Energy	7.3%	3.2%
Technology	5.6%	49.5%
Basic Materials	5.2%	5.2%
Healthcare	2.5%	1.8%
Real Estate	1.5%	1.2%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	1.9%
Industrials	0.4%	7.1%
Utilities	-	1.7%

Return for Risk

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BRIC.L

BRIC.L Risk / Return Rank: 8
BRIC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
BRIC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
BRIC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8
BRIC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
BRIC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8

FEMQ.L

FEMQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 93
FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
FEMQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.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 (FEMQ.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	FEMQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.07	3.52	-3.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.03	4.87	-4.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.00	1.67	-0.67
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.07	6.48	-6.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.14	21.32	-21.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BRIC.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.07, which is lower than the FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BRIC.L and FEMQ.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

	BRIC.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07	3.52	-3.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.23	0.65	-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	0.49	-0.37

Drawdowns

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRIC.L drawdown since its inception was -63.13%, which is greater than FEMQ.L's maximum drawdown of -28.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRIC.L and FEMQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BRIC.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.13%	-28.13%	-35.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.84%	-8.78%	-10.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.78%	-14.75%	-8.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.50%	-25.31%	-27.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-59.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.46%	-4.07%	-37.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.86%	-8.03%	-13.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.59%	2.67%	+5.92%

Volatility

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.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 (FEMQ.L) has a volatility of 9.03%. This indicates that BRIC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEMQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BRIC.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.20%	9.03%	-1.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.09%	14.19%	-1.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.29%	16.18%	+2.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.81%	15.00%	+13.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.45%	17.50%	+7.95%

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRIC.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FEMQ.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BRIC.L vs. FEMQ.L - Dividend Comparison

BRIC.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, while FEMQ.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

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%
FEMQ.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BRIC.L and FEMQ.L in my portfolio?

BRIC.L and FEMQ.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BRIC.L or FEMQ.L?

On fees, FEMQ.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BRIC.L or FEMQ.L?

FEMQ.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for BRIC.L.

What is the main difference between BRIC.L and FEMQ.L?

BRIC.L tracks FTSE BIC 50 Net of Tax Index, while FEMQ.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 FEMQ.L.