PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEDM.L achieves a 17.95% return, which is significantly lower than EMVL.L's 31.45% return.


EEDM.L

1D
-0.97%
1M
-7.35%
6M
12.82%
YTD
17.95%
1Y
33.86%
3Y*
19.43%
5Y*
6.14%
10Y*

EMVL.L

1D
-1.18%
1M
-9.38%
6M
23.78%
YTD
31.45%
1Y
56.66%
3Y*
31.82%
5Y*
15.16%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
17.95%35.48%6.70%8.18%-21.69%-2.85%19.76%7.14%
EMVL.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)
31.45%43.13%14.49%18.37%-16.29%5.29%7.72%9.29%

Correlation

The correlation between EEDM.L and EMVL.L is 0.92, 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

0.92

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

0.91

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2019

0.91

The correlation between EEDM.L and EMVL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEDM.L
EEDM.L Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

EMVL.L
EMVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EMVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.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.

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.


EEDM.LEMVL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.84

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.41

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

4.51

-2.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.99

12.55

-4.56

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is lower than the EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEDM.L and EMVL.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...

Drawdowns

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEDM.L drawdown since its inception was -40.90%, which is greater than EMVL.L's maximum drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEDM.L and EMVL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEDM.LEMVL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.90%

-34.95%

-5.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.41%

-12.49%

-0.92%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.97%

-16.42%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-36.39%

-31.61%

-4.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.31%

-12.45%

+3.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.32%

-9.51%

-6.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.20%

4.50%

-0.30%

Volatility

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L) is 9.13%, while iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) has a volatility of 10.34%. This indicates that EEDM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMVL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEDM.LEMVL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.13%

10.34%

-1.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.95%

21.31%

-1.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.88%

23.82%

-1.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.46%

20.71%

-1.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.79%

21.39%

-0.60%

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEDM.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than EMVL.L's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEDM.L vs. EMVL.L - Dividend Comparison

EEDM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.65%, while EMVL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.65%1.89%2.37%2.37%2.59%1.97%1.54%0.05%
EMVL.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, EEDM.L and EMVL.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, EEDM.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EEDM.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EMVL.L.

EEDM.L tracks MSCI EM ESG Enhanced CTB Index, while EMVL.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EEDM.L and 0.40% for EMVL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEDM.L and EMVL.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