EIMI.L vs. EMM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) and EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index, while EMM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Global X. EIMI.L is passively managed, while EMM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, EIMI.L returned 23.30%/yr vs 22.66%/yr for EMM. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EIMI.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMM.

Performance

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EIMI.L achieves a 24.25% return, which is significantly lower than EMM's 32.62% return.

EIMI.L

• 1D: -1.30%
• 1M: 4.51%
• YTD: 24.25%
• 6M: 27.21%
• 1Y: 49.41%
• 3Y*: 23.30%
• 5Y*: 7.61%
• 10Y*: 10.26%

EMM

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 6.92%
• YTD: 32.62%
• 6M: 38.30%
• 1Y: 61.27%
• 3Y*: 22.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF	24.25%	32.16%	7.36%	7.40%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	32.62%	30.21%	2.34%	3.40%

Correlation

The correlation between EIMI.L and EMM is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023	0.71

The correlation between EIMI.L and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EIMI.L	EMM
Technology	35.0%	45.5%
Financial Services	18.4%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	2.7%
Industrials	8.9%	5.9%
Basic Materials	6.9%	3.9%
Communication Services	6.4%	2.7%
Energy	3.9%	4.8%
Healthcare	3.7%	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	5.1%
Utilities	2.2%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.8%

Return for Risk

EIMI.L vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EIMI.L

EIMI.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EIMI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
EIMI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 80
EIMI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EIMI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

EMM

EMM Risk / Return Rank: 84
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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.

	EIMI.L	EMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	2.84	-0.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.42	3.68	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.51	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.88	4.17	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.02	17.49	-3.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the EMM Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EIMI.L and EMM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EIMI.L	EMM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.56	2.84	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	1.17	-0.81

Drawdowns

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EIMI.L drawdown since its inception was -38.73%, which is greater than EMM's maximum drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EIMI.L and EMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EIMI.L	EMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.73%	-21.99%	-16.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.66%	-14.75%	+2.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.44%	-21.99%	+4.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.50%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.64%	-1.41%	-1.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.04%	-4.68%	-9.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.52%	3.51%	+0.01%

Volatility

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) is 8.18%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 9.53%. This indicates that EIMI.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EIMI.L	EMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.18%	9.53%	-1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.71%	19.28%	-2.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.23%	21.69%	-2.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.31%	18.82%	-0.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.15%	18.82%	+0.33%

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EIMI.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than EMM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

EIMI.L vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison

EIMI.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.68%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	0.68%	0.90%	0.80%	0.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EIMI.L and EMM in my portfolio?

EIMI.L and EMM have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EIMI.L or EMM?

On fees, EIMI.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EIMI.L or EMM?

EIMI.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.

What is the main difference between EIMI.L and EMM?

EIMI.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EMM is Emerging Markets Diversified. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EIMI.L and 0.75% for EMM.