CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L).
CEMG.L and EIMI.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CEMG.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. It was launched on Jun 6, 2014. EIMI.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. It was launched on May 30, 2014. Both CEMG.L and EIMI.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Performance
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMG.L iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | -8.25% | 13.16% | 10.30% | 5.13% | -21.91% | -9.64% | 26.92% | 19.93% | -19.87% | 40.62% |
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF | 4.48% | 32.16% | 7.36% | 11.03% | -19.67% | -0.65% | 18.80% | 16.37% | -14.17% | 36.95% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEMG.L achieves a -8.25% return, which is significantly lower than EIMI.L's 4.48% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L has underperformed EIMI.L with an annualized return of 3.91%, while EIMI.L has yielded a comparatively higher 8.46% annualized return.
CEMG.L
- 1D
- 1.63%
- 1M
- -5.85%
- YTD
- -8.25%
- 6M
- -12.51%
- 1Y
- -0.93%
- 3Y*
- 3.89%
- 5Y*
- -2.97%
- 10Y*
- 3.91%
EIMI.L
- 1D
- 4.13%
- 1M
- -5.98%
- YTD
- 4.48%
- 6M
- 8.17%
- 1Y
- 33.96%
- 3Y*
- 16.49%
- 5Y*
- 4.75%
- 10Y*
- 8.46%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMG.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EIMI.L's 0.18% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEMG.L
EIMI.L
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.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.
| CEMG.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.06 | 1.79 | -1.85 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.03 | 2.35 | -2.31 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.34 | -0.34 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.03 | 2.68 | -2.71 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.10 | 9.80 | -9.89 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CEMG.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.06 | 1.79 | -1.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.15 | 0.27 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.20 | 0.45 | -0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.14 | 0.28 | -0.14 |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMG.L and EIMI.L is 0.90, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEMG.L nor EIMI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.10%, which is greater than EIMI.L's maximum drawdown of -38.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMG.L and EIMI.L.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMG.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.10% | -38.73% | -7.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.90% | -12.66% | -2.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.17% | -35.66% | -6.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.10% | -38.73% | -7.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.75% | -9.03% | -13.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.26% | -14.21% | -2.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.94% | 3.47% | +1.47% |
Volatility
CEMG.L vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) is 6.13%, while iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a volatility of 8.48%. This indicates that CEMG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EIMI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| CEMG.L | EIMI.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.13% | 8.48% | -2.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.33% | 13.79% | -3.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.34% | 18.87% | -2.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.19% | 17.75% | +2.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.38% | 18.90% | +0.48% |