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

Performance

EMCS vs. DBEM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMCS achieves a 35.45% return, which is significantly higher than DBEM's 33.09% return.


EMCS

1D
1.81%
1M
14.49%
YTD
35.45%
6M
39.15%
1Y
67.22%
3Y*
28.16%
5Y*
8.46%
10Y*

DBEM

1D
0.81%
1M
11.14%
YTD
33.09%
6M
35.55%
1Y
65.81%
3Y*
26.11%
5Y*
10.06%
10Y*
10.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMCS vs. DBEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF
35.45%38.71%10.12%5.68%-23.58%-2.02%19.72%19.54%-0.59%
DBEM
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF
33.09%30.42%10.61%10.53%-17.00%-2.26%18.12%16.77%-1.53%

Correlation

The correlation between EMCS and DBEM 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

0.94

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

0.93

The correlation between EMCS and DBEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMCS vs. DBEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMCS
DBEM

Technology

44.5%
36.4%

Financial Services

29.4%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.1%
9.6%

Communication Services

8.4%
7.0%

Basic Materials

2.6%
6.6%

Industrials

2.5%
7.6%

Energy

1.6%
4.1%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.1%

Utilities

0.8%
2.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.0%
3.0%

Healthcare

0.0%
2.9%

Technology

EMCS
44.5%
DBEM
36.4%

Financial Services

EMCS
29.4%
DBEM
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

EMCS
9.1%
DBEM
9.6%

Communication Services

EMCS
8.4%
DBEM
7.0%

Basic Materials

EMCS
2.6%
DBEM
6.6%

Industrials

EMCS
2.5%
DBEM
7.6%

Energy

EMCS
1.6%
DBEM
4.1%

Real Estate

EMCS
1.0%
DBEM
1.1%

Utilities

EMCS
0.8%
DBEM
2.1%

Consumer Defensive

EMCS
0.0%
DBEM
3.0%

Healthcare

EMCS
0.0%
DBEM
2.9%

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

EMCS vs. DBEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMCS
EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

DBEM
DBEM Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
DBEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DBEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
DBEM Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
DBEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
DBEM Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

EMCS vs. DBEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


EMCSDBEMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.03

3.69

-0.66

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.84

4.73

-0.89

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

1.66

-0.12

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.78

6.29

-1.51

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.54

25.09

-6.55

EMCS vs. DBEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMCS Sharpe Ratio is 3.03, which is comparable to the DBEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMCS and DBEM, 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


EMCSDBEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.03

3.69

-0.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.59

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.55

0.34

+0.22

Drawdowns

EMCS vs. DBEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMCS drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, which is greater than DBEM's maximum drawdown of -33.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMCS and DBEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMCSDBEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.86%

-33.51%

-11.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.32%

-10.51%

-3.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.73%

-15.12%

-1.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.06%

-30.48%

-11.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.62%

-11.69%

-4.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.69%

2.63%

+1.06%

Volatility

EMCS vs. DBEM - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a higher volatility of 9.71% compared to Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF (DBEM) at 7.46%. This indicates that EMCS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DBEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMCSDBEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.71%

7.46%

+2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.36%

15.50%

+3.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.33%

17.94%

+4.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.63%

17.08%

+3.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.65%

17.14%

+4.51%

EMCS vs. DBEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMCS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than DBEM's 0.66% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMCS vs. DBEM - Dividend Comparison

EMCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than DBEM's 1.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DBEM
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Hedged Equity ETF
1.38%1.84%2.48%2.55%2.65%1.77%1.74%2.59%2.85%1.51%1.59%3.49%
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF
1.23%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 0.92, EMCS and DBEM 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 (9.71%) compared to DBEM (7.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMCS dropped -44.86% vs DBEM's -33.51%.

On 5-year performance, DBEM leads with 10.06% vs 8.46% for EMCS. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, DBEM has been the lower-risk option at 7.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, DBEM has performed better with a 10.06% return vs 8.46%. 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 0.66% for DBEM.

DBEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 1.23% for EMCS.

EMCS tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index, while DBEM tracks MSCI EM US Dollar Hedged Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for EMCS and 0.66% for DBEM.

DBEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.69 vs 3.03), 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 EMCS and DBEM

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