CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L
CEMG.L (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and XLPS.L (Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc) are both Consumer Staples Equities funds - CEMG.L tracks the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR while XLPS.L tracks the S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Consumer Staples Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L returned 3.80%/yr vs 7.56%/yr for XLPS.L. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEMG.L charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for XLPS.L.
Performance
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.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 XLPS.L's 6.41% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMG.L has underperformed XLPS.L with an annualized return of 3.80%, while XLPS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 7.56% 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%
XLPS.L
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -2.80%
- YTD
- 6.41%
- 6M
- 6.85%
- 1Y
- 2.14%
- 3Y*
- 8.35%
- 5Y*
- 6.76%
- 10Y*
- 7.56%
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.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% |
XLPS.L Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc | 6.41% | 3.99% | 14.25% | -0.26% | -0.17% | 18.05% | 9.16% | 26.86% | -9.41% | 12.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMG.L and XLPS.L is 0.14, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2014 | 0.37 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CEMG.L and XLPS.L has dropped to 0.14 - well below their long-term average of 0.37, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Communication Services
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Energy
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
Consumer Defensive
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
-
Communication Services
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
-
Healthcare
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
-
Technology
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
Industrials
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
Financial Services
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
-
Real Estate
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
-
Basic Materials
CEMG.L
-
XLPS.L
-
Energy
CEMG.L
-
XLPS.L
-
Utilities
CEMG.L
-
XLPS.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. XLPS.L — Risk / Return Rank
CEMG.L
XLPS.L
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.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 Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLPS.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 | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.94 | 1.04 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 0.23 | -0.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.98 | 0.48 | -1.46 |
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 | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.44 | 0.16 | -0.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.15 | 0.51 | -0.66 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.56 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.15 | 0.81 | -0.67 |
Drawdowns
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMG.L drawdown since its inception was -46.10%, which is greater than XLPS.L's maximum drawdown of -23.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMG.L and XLPS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -46.10% | -23.98% | -22.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.90% | -9.32% | -5.58% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.50% | -12.43% | -3.07% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.17% | -17.31% | -24.86% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.10% | -23.98% | -22.12% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -22.17% | -8.06% | -14.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.32% | -3.71% | -12.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.61% | 4.42% | +2.19% |
Volatility
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) is 4.47%, while Invesco Consumer Staples S&P US Select Sector UCITS ETF Acc (XLPS.L) has a volatility of 5.56%. This indicates that CEMG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XLPS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEMG.L | XLPS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.47% | 5.56% | -1.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.10% | 11.13% | +0.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.62% | 13.64% | +0.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.36% | 13.25% | +7.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.49% | 13.62% | +5.87% |
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMG.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XLPS.L's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEMG.L vs. XLPS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CEMG.L nor XLPS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CEMG.L and XLPS.L have a correlation of 0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XLPS.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XLPS.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CEMG.L.
CEMG.L tracks Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, while XLPS.L tracks S&P® Select Sector Capped 20% Consumer Staples Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CEMG.L and 0.14% for XLPS.L.
Find the right allocation for CEMG.L and XLPS.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