EDIV vs. XCEM
EDIV (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EDIV tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EDIV returned 9.37%/yr vs 13.36%/yr for XCEM. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EDIV charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.
Performance
EDIV vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDIV achieves a 7.52% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 43.27% return. Over the past 10 years, EDIV has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 9.37%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 13.36% annualized return.
EDIV
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 1.60%
- YTD
- 7.52%
- 6M
- 8.10%
- 1Y
- 16.43%
- 3Y*
- 18.50%
- 5Y*
- 11.38%
- 10Y*
- 9.37%
XCEM
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 11.26%
- YTD
- 43.27%
- 6M
- 46.87%
- 1Y
- 73.75%
- 3Y*
- 27.69%
- 5Y*
- 13.15%
- 10Y*
- 13.36%
EDIV vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDIV SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF | 7.52% | 16.45% | 12.75% | 41.91% | -15.31% | 11.21% | -9.95% | 11.80% | -6.16% | 28.20% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 43.27% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 7.87% | 9.47% | 19.74% | -11.75% | 34.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDIV and XCEM is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 2, 2015 | 0.71 |
The correlation between EDIV and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
EDIV vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EDIV
XCEM
Financial Services
Consumer Defensive
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Industrials
Communication Services
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Financial Services
EDIV
XCEM
Consumer Defensive
EDIV
XCEM
Consumer Cyclical
EDIV
XCEM
Technology
EDIV
XCEM
Industrials
EDIV
XCEM
Communication Services
EDIV
XCEM
Energy
EDIV
XCEM
Real Estate
EDIV
XCEM
Utilities
EDIV
XCEM
Basic Materials
EDIV
XCEM
Healthcare
EDIV
XCEM
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
EDIV vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank
EDIV
XCEM
EDIV vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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.
| EDIV | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.57 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.59 | 5.13 | -3.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.77 | 19.88 | -15.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EDIV vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDIV drawdown since its inception was -53.36%, which is greater than XCEM's maximum drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDIV and XCEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDIV | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.36% | -41.24% | -12.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.36% | -14.46% | +4.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.84% | -18.92% | +5.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.32% | -29.57% | +1.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.76% | -41.24% | +0.48% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.07% | 0.00% | -3.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.31% | -8.57% | -10.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.45% | 3.72% | -0.27% |
Volatility
EDIV vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV) is 4.56%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 12.12%. This indicates that EDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EDIV | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.56% | 12.12% | -7.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.63% | 21.53% | -10.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.60% | 23.42% | -10.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.90% | 18.38% | -4.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.47% | 19.91% | -2.44% |
EDIV vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDIV has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDIV vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison
EDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.77%, more than XCEM's 2.27% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDIV SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF | 5.77% | 4.69% | 3.94% | 4.26% | 4.94% | 3.84% | 3.52% | 3.83% | 3.41% | 2.99% | 4.94% | 5.33% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 2.27% | 3.25% | 2.76% | 1.22% | 2.42% | 1.94% | 1.63% | 2.11% | 2.70% | 9.56% | 1.24% | 2.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDIV and XCEM have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XCEM has higher volatility (12.12%) compared to EDIV (4.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDIV dropped -53.36% vs XCEM's -41.24%.
On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 13.36% vs 9.37% for EDIV. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, EDIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 13.36% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EDIV.
EDIV has the higher dividend yield at 5.77%, compared with 2.27% for XCEM.
EDIV tracks S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EDIV and 0.16% for XCEM.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 1.31), 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 EDIV and XCEM
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