PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ECON vs. EMCS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ECON vs. EMCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ECON having a 35.02% return and EMCS slightly lower at 33.83%.


ECON

1D
-1.24%
1M
13.52%
YTD
35.02%
6M
38.26%
1Y
65.21%
3Y*
23.87%
5Y*
7.11%
10Y*
6.10%

EMCS

1D
-1.20%
1M
13.15%
YTD
33.83%
6M
37.78%
1Y
64.32%
3Y*
27.65%
5Y*
7.95%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ECON vs. EMCS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
35.02%34.15%0.22%7.51%-16.00%-14.11%20.83%17.22%-2.36%
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF
33.83%38.71%10.12%5.68%-23.58%-2.02%19.72%19.54%-0.59%

Correlation

The correlation between ECON and EMCS 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

0.93

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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2018

0.92

The correlation between ECON and EMCS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECON vs. EMCS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ECON
EMCS

Technology

30.4%
44.5%

Financial Services

24.5%
29.4%

Communication Services

10.2%
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
9.1%

Basic Materials

7.1%
2.6%

Industrials

6.5%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
0.0%

Energy

3.5%
1.6%

Healthcare

2.8%
0.0%

Utilities

1.4%
0.8%

Real Estate

1.4%
1.0%

Technology

ECON
30.4%
EMCS
44.5%

Financial Services

ECON
24.5%
EMCS
29.4%

Communication Services

ECON
10.2%
EMCS
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

ECON
8.6%
EMCS
9.1%

Basic Materials

ECON
7.1%
EMCS
2.6%

Industrials

ECON
6.5%
EMCS
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

ECON
3.5%
EMCS
0.0%

Energy

ECON
3.5%
EMCS
1.6%

Healthcare

ECON
2.8%
EMCS
0.0%

Utilities

ECON
1.4%
EMCS
0.8%

Real Estate

ECON
1.4%
EMCS
1.0%

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

ECON vs. EMCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECON
ECON Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

EMCS
EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

ECON vs. EMCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). 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.


ECONEMCSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.22

2.89

+0.33

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.16

3.70

+0.46

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.52

+0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.76

4.51

+0.25

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

17.83

17.47

+0.36

ECON vs. EMCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECON Sharpe Ratio is 3.22, which is comparable to the EMCS Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECON and EMCS, 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


ECONEMCSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.22

2.89

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.39

-0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.24

0.55

-0.31

Drawdowns

ECON vs. EMCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECON drawdown since its inception was -45.37%, roughly equal to the maximum EMCS drawdown of -44.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECON and EMCS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ECONEMCSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.37%

-44.86%

-0.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.76%

-14.32%

+0.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.37%

-16.73%

+0.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.08%

-42.06%

+3.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.24%

-1.20%

-0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.65%

-16.61%

-0.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.67%

3.69%

-0.02%

Volatility

ECON vs. EMCS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) is 9.10%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a volatility of 9.86%. This indicates that ECON experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ECONEMCSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.10%

9.86%

-0.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.65%

19.42%

-1.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.38%

22.37%

-1.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.28%

20.62%

-0.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.03%

21.65%

-0.62%

ECON vs. EMCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECON has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than EMCS's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

ECON vs. EMCS - Dividend Comparison

ECON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, more than EMCS's 1.24% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
1.31%1.77%0.76%1.57%2.06%1.08%0.63%1.68%0.98%0.35%0.74%1.10%
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF
1.24%1.66%0.67%3.07%2.26%1.46%1.40%3.56%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, ECON and EMCS 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.

EMCS has higher volatility (9.86%) compared to ECON (9.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECON dropped -45.37% vs EMCS's -44.86%.

On 5-year performance, EMCS leads with 7.95% vs 7.11% for ECON. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, ECON has been the lower-risk option at 9.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 7.95% return vs 7.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ECON.

ECON has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.24% for EMCS.

ECON tracks Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index, while EMCS tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ECON and 0.15% for EMCS.

ECON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.22 vs 2.89), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ECON and EMCS

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