E127.L vs. XMMS.L
E127.L (Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist) and XMMS.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from Amundi and Xtrackers respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, E127.L returned 9.22%/yr vs 8.45%/yr for XMMS.L. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. E127.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for XMMS.L.
Performance
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
E127.L is traded in GBP, while XMMS.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XMMS.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 XMMS.L slightly higher at 26.72%.
E127.L
- 1D
- -1.40%
- 1M
- 6.35%
- YTD
- 26.18%
- 6M
- 28.72%
- 1Y
- 54.75%
- 3Y*
- 21.77%
- 5Y*
- 9.22%
- 10Y*
- —
XMMS.L
- 1D
- -1.59%
- 1M
- 6.34%
- YTD
- 26.72%
- 6M
- 27.92%
- 1Y
- 53.72%
- 3Y*
- 20.94%
- 5Y*
- 8.45%
- 10Y*
- —
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E127.L Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist | 26.18% | 25.81% | 10.12% | 3.48% | -9.65% | -1.28% | 23.50% |
XMMS.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C | 26.72% | 24.71% | 9.13% | 2.81% | -10.67% | -1.61% | 26.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between E127.L and XMMS.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2020 | 0.95 |
The correlation between E127.L and XMMS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
E127.L
XMMS.L
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
E127.L
XMMS.L
Financial Services
E127.L
XMMS.L
Consumer Cyclical
E127.L
XMMS.L
Industrials
E127.L
XMMS.L
Communication Services
E127.L
XMMS.L
Basic Materials
E127.L
XMMS.L
Energy
E127.L
XMMS.L
Consumer Defensive
E127.L
XMMS.L
Healthcare
E127.L
XMMS.L
Utilities
E127.L
XMMS.L
Real Estate
E127.L
XMMS.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
E127.L vs. XMMS.L — Risk / Return Rank
E127.L
XMMS.L
E127.L vs. XMMS.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 (XMMS.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.L | XMMS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 1.58 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.04 | 4.84 | +0.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.09 | 17.09 | +1.00 |
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
| E127.L | XMMS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.25 | 3.17 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 | 0.53 | +0.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 0.45 | +0.30 |
Drawdowns
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum E127.L drawdown since its inception was -26.68%, roughly equal to the maximum XMMS.L drawdown of -27.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for E127.L and XMMS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| E127.L | XMMS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.68% | -27.76% | +1.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.82% | -11.04% | +0.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.31% | -15.26% | -0.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.89% | -24.32% | +1.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.33% | -2.42% | +0.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.34% | -10.00% | -0.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.02% | 3.13% | -0.11% |
Volatility
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Volatility Comparison
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) have volatilities of 7.32% and 7.37%, 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
| E127.L | XMMS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.32% | 7.37% | -0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.30% | 14.36% | -0.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.79% | 16.90% | -0.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.18% | 16.56% | -0.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.39% | 18.84% | -2.45% |
E127.L vs. XMMS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
E127.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than XMMS.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. XMMS.L - Dividend Comparison
E127.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, while XMMS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E127.L Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist | 1.96% | 2.47% | 4.04% | 4.40% | 2.79% | 2.25% |
XMMS.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 0.99, E127.L and XMMS.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 XMMS.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for E127.L and 0.18% for XMMS.L.
Find the right allocation for E127.L and XMMS.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