PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CESG.L vs. EEDM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) and iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CESG.L achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly lower than EEDM.L's 17.95% return.


CESG.L

1D
0.11%
1M
2.28%
6M
2.77%
YTD
2.70%
1Y
5.82%
3Y*
9.53%
5Y*
5.33%
10Y*

EEDM.L

1D
-0.97%
1M
-7.35%
6M
12.82%
YTD
17.95%
1Y
33.86%
3Y*
19.43%
5Y*
6.14%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
CESG.L
First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc
2.70%11.47%9.71%12.32%-13.97%23.33%
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
17.95%35.48%6.70%8.18%-21.69%-3.75%

Correlation

The correlation between CESG.L and EEDM.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

0.45

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2021

0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between CESG.L and EEDM.L has dropped to 0.26 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

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

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CESG.L
CESG.L Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
CESG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CESG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
CESG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
CESG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
CESG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

EEDM.L
EEDM.L Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) and iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.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.


CESG.LEEDM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.29

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.55

2.50

-1.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.42

7.99

-6.57

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CESG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CESG.L and EEDM.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

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CESG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.69%, smaller than the maximum EEDM.L drawdown of -40.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CESG.L and EEDM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CESG.LEEDM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.69%

-40.90%

+18.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.81%

-13.41%

+4.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.31%

-16.97%

+6.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.69%

-36.39%

+13.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.54%

-9.31%

+7.77%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.52%

-16.32%

+10.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.41%

4.20%

-0.79%

Volatility

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) is 3.44%, while iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L) has a volatility of 9.13%. This indicates that CESG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEDM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CESG.LEEDM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.44%

9.13%

-5.69%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.01%

19.95%

-11.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.97%

21.88%

-11.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.62%

19.46%

-6.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.53%

20.79%

-8.26%

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CESG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EEDM.L's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

CESG.L vs. EEDM.L - Dividend Comparison

CESG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EEDM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
CESG.L
First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.65%1.89%2.37%2.37%2.59%1.97%1.54%0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions


CESG.L and EEDM.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, EEDM.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EEDM.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CESG.L.

CESG.L is categorized as ESG, while EEDM.L is Emerging Markets Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CESG.L and 0.18% for EEDM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CESG.L and EEDM.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