DBEM vs. EMXC
DBEM (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - DBEM tracks the MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index while EMXC tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DBEM returned 9.17%/yr vs 12.43%/yr for EMXC. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DBEM charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.
Performance
DBEM vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DBEM achieves a 27.92% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 37.89% return.
DBEM
- 1D
- -5.21%
- 1M
- 2.97%
- YTD
- 27.92%
- 6M
- 28.44%
- 1Y
- 54.61%
- 3Y*
- 24.78%
- 5Y*
- 9.17%
- 10Y*
- 10.69%
EMXC
- 1D
- -6.44%
- 1M
- 4.83%
- YTD
- 37.89%
- 6M
- 39.80%
- 1Y
- 67.97%
- 3Y*
- 27.65%
- 5Y*
- 12.43%
- 10Y*
- —
DBEM vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF | 27.92% | 30.42% | 10.61% | 10.53% | -17.00% | -2.26% | 18.12% | 16.77% | -10.81% | 7.38% |
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF | 37.89% | 35.14% | 2.68% | 18.96% | -19.56% | 8.54% | 12.76% | 15.80% | -12.96% | 7.16% |
Correlation
The correlation between DBEM and EMXC is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2017 | 0.81 |
The correlation between DBEM and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
DBEM vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DBEM
EMXC
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
DBEM
EMXC
Financial Services
DBEM
EMXC
Consumer Cyclical
DBEM
EMXC
Industrials
DBEM
EMXC
Communication Services
DBEM
EMXC
Basic Materials
DBEM
EMXC
Energy
DBEM
EMXC
Consumer Defensive
DBEM
EMXC
Healthcare
DBEM
EMXC
Utilities
DBEM
EMXC
Real Estate
DBEM
EMXC
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
DBEM vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank
DBEM
EMXC
DBEM vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.
| DBEM | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.49 | 1.50 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.22 | 4.74 | +0.48 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.15 | 18.14 | +1.01 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
DBEM vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DBEM drawdown since its inception was -33.51%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DBEM and EMXC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DBEM | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.51% | -42.81% | +9.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.51% | -14.41% | +3.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.12% | -19.12% | +4.00% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.48% | -28.91% | -1.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.51% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.21% | -6.44% | +1.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.66% | -10.15% | -1.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.86% | 3.76% | -0.90% |
Volatility
DBEM vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) is 11.58%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 14.74%. This indicates that DBEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DBEM | EMXC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.58% | 14.74% | -3.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.66% | 23.44% | -4.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.69% | 25.27% | -4.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 18.40% | -0.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.39% | 20.25% | -2.86% |
DBEM vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison
DBEM has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
DBEM vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison
DBEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.06%, more than EMXC's 1.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DBEM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF | 2.06% | 1.84% | 2.48% | 2.55% | 2.65% | 1.77% | 1.74% | 2.59% | 2.85% | 1.51% | 1.59% | 3.49% |
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF | 1.93% | 2.82% | 2.69% | 1.83% | 2.85% | 1.78% | 1.45% | 3.25% | 2.63% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DBEM and EMXC have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMXC has higher volatility (14.74%) compared to DBEM (11.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DBEM dropped -33.51% vs EMXC's -42.81%.
On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.43% vs 9.17% for DBEM. On fees, EMXC is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, DBEM has been the lower-risk option at 11.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.43% return vs 9.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMXC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DBEM.
DBEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 1.93% for EMXC.
DBEM tracks MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DBEM and 0.49% for EMXC.
EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.65), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for DBEM and EMXC
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