CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L
CEMG.L (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and XDWS.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C) are both Consumer Staples Equities funds tracking the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, from iShares and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L returned 3.80%/yr vs 5.57%/yr for XDWS.L. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEMG.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XDWS.L.
Performance
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEMG.L achieves a -7.56% return, which is significantly lower than XDWS.L's 3.29% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L has underperformed XDWS.L with an annualized return of 3.80%, while XDWS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 5.57% annualized return.
CEMG.L
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.99%
- YTD
- -7.56%
- 6M
- -8.07%
- 1Y
- -6.47%
- 3Y*
- 5.85%
- 5Y*
- -3.07%
- 10Y*
- 3.80%
XDWS.L
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- -2.75%
- YTD
- 3.29%
- 6M
- 3.85%
- 1Y
- 0.79%
- 3Y*
- 6.17%
- 5Y*
- 3.97%
- 10Y*
- 5.57%
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.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) | -7.56% | 13.16% | 10.30% | 5.13% | -21.91% | -9.64% | 26.92% | 19.93% | -19.87% | 40.62% |
XDWS.L Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C | 3.29% | 9.31% | 5.69% | 1.96% | -5.24% | 12.84% | 7.75% | 22.32% | -10.10% | 17.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMG.L and XDWS.L is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2016 | 0.47 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CEMG.L and XDWS.L has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.47, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
Technology
-
Industrials
-
Financial Services
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
Consumer Defensive
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
Communication Services
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
-
Healthcare
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
Technology
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
-
Industrials
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
-
Financial Services
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
Real Estate
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
-
Basic Materials
CEMG.L
-
XDWS.L
-
Energy
CEMG.L
-
XDWS.L
-
Utilities
CEMG.L
-
XDWS.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
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEMG.L
XDWS.L
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.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 Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.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 | XDWS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.02 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 0.08 | -0.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.98 | 0.18 | -1.16 |
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
| CEMG.L | XDWS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.44 | 0.06 | -0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.15 | 0.33 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.45 | -0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.47 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.10%, which is greater than XDWS.L's maximum drawdown of -23.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMG.L and XDWS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMG.L | XDWS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.10% | -23.72% | -22.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.90% | -9.74% | -5.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.50% | -11.52% | -3.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.17% | -17.53% | -24.64% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.10% | -23.72% | -22.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.17% | -8.95% | -13.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.32% | -4.20% | -12.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.61% | 4.38% | +2.23% |
Volatility
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) and Xtrackers MSCI World Consumer Staples UCITS ETF 1C (XDWS.L) have volatilities of 4.47% and 4.62%, 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
| CEMG.L | XDWS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.47% | 4.62% | -0.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.10% | 10.21% | +1.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.62% | 12.38% | +2.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.36% | 12.11% | +8.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.49% | 12.48% | +7.01% |
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMG.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XDWS.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEMG.L vs. XDWS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEMG.L nor XDWS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CEMG.L and XDWS.L have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XDWS.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XDWS.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CEMG.L.
Both ETFs track Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CEMG.L and 0.25% for XDWS.L.
Find the right allocation for CEMG.L and XDWS.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