PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EDG2.L (iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from iShares and HSBC respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EDG2.L returned 7.75%/yr vs 5.72%/yr for HMEF.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. EDG2.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for HMEF.L.

Performance

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EDG2.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EDG2.L is traded in GBP, while HMEF.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HMEF.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 EDG2.L having a 25.10% return and HMEF.L slightly higher at 25.52%.

EDG2.L

1D
-1.36%
1M
6.61%
YTD
25.10%
6M
26.84%
1Y
51.62%
3Y*
20.29%
5Y*
7.75%
10Y*
—

HMEF.L

1D
-1.66%
1M
6.53%
YTD
25.52%
6M
27.29%
1Y
51.20%
3Y*
17.76%
5Y*
5.72%
10Y*
8.47%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EDG2.L
iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		25.10%26.14%8.61%2.17%-12.40%-1.62%15.80%2.32%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		25.52%21.88%6.43%-0.16%-12.59%-4.10%12.68%3.37%

Correlation

The correlation between EDG2.L and HMEF.L is 0.98 - 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

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 25, 2019

0.98

The correlation between EDG2.L and HMEF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EDG2.L
HMEF.L

Technology

43.1%
42.9%

Financial Services

17.9%
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
8.7%

Industrials

7.0%
6.8%

Communication Services

6.3%
6.2%

Basic Materials

5.5%
5.9%

Energy

3.4%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
2.7%

Healthcare

2.6%
2.6%

Utilities

1.7%
1.9%

Real Estate

1.3%
1.0%

Technology

EDG2.L
43.1%
HMEF.L
42.9%

Financial Services

EDG2.L
17.9%
HMEF.L
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EDG2.L
8.6%
HMEF.L
8.7%

Industrials

EDG2.L
7.0%
HMEF.L
6.8%

Communication Services

EDG2.L
6.3%
HMEF.L
6.2%

Basic Materials

EDG2.L
5.5%
HMEF.L
5.9%

Energy

EDG2.L
3.4%
HMEF.L
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

EDG2.L
2.7%
HMEF.L
2.7%

Healthcare

EDG2.L
2.6%
HMEF.L
2.6%

Utilities

EDG2.L
1.7%
HMEF.L
1.9%

Real Estate

EDG2.L
1.3%
HMEF.L
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.

iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD

Often compared with EDG2.L:
EDG2.L vs. EMIM.LEDG2.L vs. VERX.LEDG2.L vs. CSPX.LEDG2.L vs. ENPHEDG2.L vs. SEDY.LEDG2.L vs. EIMI.LEDG2.L vs. DGSE.L
Often compared with HMEF.L:
HMEF.L vs. VFEG.LHMEF.L vs. IEEM.LHMEF.L vs. AIAI.LHMEF.L vs. EMIM.LHMEF.L vs. VWRL.LHMEF.L vs. EQQQ.LHMEF.L vs. HMWO.L

Return for Risk

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EDG2.L
EDG2.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EDG2.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EDG2.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
EDG2.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
EDG2.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
EDG2.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
HMEF.L
HMEF.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EDG2.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.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.

EDG2.LHMEF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.00
2.99

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.88
3.88

0.00

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.55

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.54

4.60

-0.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.95

15.90

+0.05

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDG2.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.00, which is comparable to the HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDG2.L and HMEF.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

EDG2.LHMEF.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.00

2.99

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.35

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.47

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.27

+0.25

Drawdowns

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDG2.L drawdown since its inception was -28.22%, smaller than the maximum HMEF.L drawdown of -32.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDG2.L and HMEF.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EDG2.LHMEF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.22%

-32.91%

+4.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.31%

-11.07%

-0.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.35%

-15.40%

+0.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.03%

-26.99%

+1.96%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-30.58%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.52%

-2.56%

+0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.12%

-12.28%

+0.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.23%

3.21%

+0.02%

Volatility

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EDG2.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) have volatilities of 7.51% and 7.42%, 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

EDG2.LHMEF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.51%

7.42%

+0.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.69%

14.61%

+0.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.13%

17.04%

+0.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.14%

16.23%

-0.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.91%

17.92%

-0.01%

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDG2.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than HMEF.L's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EDG2.L vs. HMEF.L - Dividend Comparison

EDG2.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HMEF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EDG2.L
iShares MSCI EM ESG Enhanced UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		0.02%0.02%0.02%0.03%0.03%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.98, EDG2.L and HMEF.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, HMEF.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMEF.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for EDG2.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EDG2.L and 0.15% for HMEF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EDG2.L and HMEF.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