PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
E127.L vs. XMME.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

E127.L is traded in GBP, while XMME.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XMME.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with E127.L having a 26.18% return and XMME.L slightly higher at 27.00%.


E127.L

1D
-1.40%
1M
6.35%
YTD
26.18%
6M
28.72%
1Y
54.75%
3Y*
21.77%
5Y*
9.22%
10Y*

XMME.L

1D
-1.55%
1M
6.15%
YTD
27.00%
6M
27.77%
1Y
53.60%
3Y*
21.03%
5Y*
8.46%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
E127.L
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist
26.18%25.81%10.12%3.48%-9.65%-1.28%23.50%
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
27.00%24.25%9.25%4.13%-11.35%-1.89%25.52%

Correlation

The correlation between E127.L and XMME.L is 0.94, 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

0.94

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.95

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

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2020

0.93

The correlation between E127.L and XMME.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
E127.L
XMME.L

Technology

36.9%
36.9%

Financial Services

19.5%
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
9.6%

Industrials

7.5%
7.4%

Communication Services

6.9%
7.0%

Basic Materials

6.6%
6.5%

Energy

4.1%
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
3.0%

Healthcare

2.9%
2.9%

Utilities

2.1%
2.1%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.1%

Technology

E127.L
36.9%
XMME.L
36.9%

Financial Services

E127.L
19.5%
XMME.L
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

E127.L
9.6%
XMME.L
9.6%

Industrials

E127.L
7.5%
XMME.L
7.4%

Communication Services

E127.L
6.9%
XMME.L
7.0%

Basic Materials

E127.L
6.6%
XMME.L
6.5%

Energy

E127.L
4.1%
XMME.L
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

E127.L
3.0%
XMME.L
3.0%

Healthcare

E127.L
2.9%
XMME.L
2.9%

Utilities

E127.L
2.1%
XMME.L
2.1%

Real Estate

E127.L
1.0%
XMME.L
1.1%

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

E127.L vs. XMME.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

E127.L
E127.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
E127.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
E127.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
E127.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
E127.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
E127.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

XMME.L
XMME.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
XMME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XMME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
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.

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.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.


E127.LXMME.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.53

+0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.04

4.94

+0.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.09

16.72

+1.37

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current E127.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is comparable to the XMME.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of E127.L and XMME.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


E127.LXMME.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.25

2.91

+0.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

0.50

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.44

+0.30

Drawdowns

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum E127.L drawdown since its inception was -26.68%, roughly equal to the maximum XMME.L drawdown of -27.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for E127.L and XMME.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


E127.LXMME.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.68%

-27.98%

+1.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.82%

-10.80%

-0.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.31%

-15.74%

+0.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.89%

-24.54%

+1.65%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.33%

-2.44%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.34%

-10.03%

-0.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.02%

3.20%

-0.18%

Volatility

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) is 7.32%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a volatility of 7.88%. This indicates that E127.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMME.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


E127.LXMME.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.32%

7.88%

-0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.30%

15.86%

-1.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.79%

18.38%

-1.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.18%

17.04%

-0.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.39%

18.93%

-2.54%

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

E127.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than XMME.L's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

E127.L vs. XMME.L - Dividend Comparison

E127.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, while XMME.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
E127.L
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist
1.96%2.47%4.04%4.40%2.79%2.25%
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, E127.L and XMME.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, E127.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

E127.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for XMME.L.

E127.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for E127.L and 0.18% for XMME.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for E127.L and XMME.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