PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

CEMA.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc) and XDJP.L (Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D) are both exchange-traded funds - CEMA.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM Asia Index Net, while XDJP.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the TOPIX TR JPY. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMA.L returned 10.13%/yr vs 12.12%/yr for XDJP.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CEMA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for XDJP.L.

Performance

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CEMA.L achieves a 22.45% return, which is significantly lower than XDJP.L's 31.03% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMA.L has underperformed XDJP.L with an annualized return of 10.13%, while XDJP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.12% annualized return.

CEMA.L

1D
-0.48%
1M
-7.06%
6M
16.81%
YTD
22.45%
1Y
40.02%
3Y*
21.86%
5Y*
7.43%
10Y*
10.13%

XDJP.L

1D
-0.75%
1M
-3.10%
6M
23.29%
YTD
31.03%
1Y
59.23%
3Y*
23.27%
5Y*
12.35%
10Y*
12.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CEMA.L
iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc		22.45%33.97%12.43%6.65%-21.47%-5.32%28.23%17.50%-14.51%40.34%
XDJP.L
Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D		31.03%30.18%7.85%21.61%-19.86%-4.66%25.50%21.26%-8.99%25.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CEMA.L and XDJP.L is 0.73, 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

0.73

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

0.61

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

0.62

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2013

0.60

The correlation between CEMA.L and XDJP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (all time) to 0.73 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
CEMA.L
XDJP.L

Technology

54.6%
33.3%

Financial Services

13.4%
2.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
16.6%

Industrials

6.3%
18.2%

Communication Services

6.0%
14.3%

Basic Materials

3.1%
4.1%

Healthcare

2.7%
6.1%

Energy

2.2%
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.9%
2.9%

Utilities

1.2%
0.1%

Real Estate

0.6%
1.2%

Technology

CEMA.L
54.6%
XDJP.L
33.3%

Financial Services

CEMA.L
13.4%
XDJP.L
2.9%

Consumer Cyclical

CEMA.L
7.9%
XDJP.L
16.6%

Industrials

CEMA.L
6.3%
XDJP.L
18.2%

Communication Services

CEMA.L
6.0%
XDJP.L
14.3%

Basic Materials

CEMA.L
3.1%
XDJP.L
4.1%

Healthcare

CEMA.L
2.7%
XDJP.L
6.1%

Energy

CEMA.L
2.2%
XDJP.L
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

CEMA.L
1.9%
XDJP.L
2.9%

Utilities

CEMA.L
1.2%
XDJP.L
0.1%

Real Estate

CEMA.L
0.6%
XDJP.L
1.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc

Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D

Often compared with CEMA.L:
CEMA.L vs. ESPS.LCEMA.L vs. EIMI.LCEMA.L vs. CSPX.ASCEMA.L vs. XMTW.LCEMA.L vs. ISAC.LCEMA.L vs. CSKR.LCEMA.L vs. CPJ1.L
Often compared with XDJP.L:
XDJP.L vs. CNKY.LXDJP.L vs. VJPN.LXDJP.L vs. DXJXDJP.L vs. DXJG.LXDJP.L vs. CSJP.LXDJP.L vs. PRIJ.LXDJP.L vs. JPJP.L

Return for Risk

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CEMA.L
CEMA.L Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
CEMA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEMA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEMA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
CEMA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEMA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank
XDJP.L
XDJP.L Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
XDJP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XDJP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
XDJP.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.

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

CEMA.LXDJP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.68
2.21

-0.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.27
3.00

-0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.36

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.89

3.84

-0.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.20

12.02

-2.82

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CEMA.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is comparable to the XDJP.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CEMA.L and XDJP.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...

Drawdowns

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CEMA.L drawdown since its inception was -45.51%, smaller than the maximum XDJP.L drawdown of -99.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMA.L and XDJP.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CEMA.LXDJP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.51%

-99.99%

+54.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.77%

-15.36%

+1.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.95%

-19.06%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.96%

-33.97%

-4.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.51%

-35.79%

-9.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.59%

-99.97%

+90.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.52%

-99.41%

+84.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.34%

4.91%

-0.57%

Volatility

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc (CEMA.L) and Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D (XDJP.L) have volatilities of 10.19% and 10.04%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CEMA.LXDJP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.19%

10.04%

+0.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.60%

21.79%

-0.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.77%

26.64%

-2.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.87%

20.52%

+0.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.15%

18.74%

+1.41%

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CEMA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than XDJP.L's 0.09% 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

CEMA.L vs. XDJP.L - Dividend Comparison

CEMA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XDJP.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEMA.L
iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD Acc		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XDJP.L
Xtrackers Nikkei 225 UCITS ETF 1D		1.05%1.33%1.41%1.60%2.47%1.20%1.11%1.13%1.24%0.72%0.83%0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

CEMA.L and XDJP.L have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XDJP.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XDJP.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CEMA.L.

CEMA.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XDJP.L is Japan Equities. CEMA.L tracks MSCI EM Asia Index Net, while XDJP.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CEMA.L and 0.09% for XDJP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CEMA.L and XDJP.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