EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L
EMDL.L (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF) and XQUA.L (Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMDL.L tracks the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD while XQUA.L tracks the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMDL.L returned 2.73%/yr vs 1.70%/yr for XQUA.L. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMDL.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for XQUA.L.
Performance
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
EMDL.L is traded in GBP, while XQUA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XQUA.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMDL.L achieves a -0.66% return, which is significantly lower than XQUA.L's 1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, EMDL.L has outperformed XQUA.L with an annualized return of 2.73%, while XQUA.L has yielded a comparatively lower 1.70% annualized return.
EMDL.L
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.48%
- YTD
- -0.66%
- 6M
- -0.55%
- 1Y
- 5.93%
- 3Y*
- 2.66%
- 5Y*
- 1.57%
- 10Y*
- 2.73%
XQUA.L
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- 1.51%
- YTD
- 1.35%
- 6M
- 0.27%
- 1Y
- 9.13%
- 3Y*
- 2.60%
- 5Y*
- 0.97%
- 10Y*
- 1.70%
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMDL.L SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF | -0.66% | 7.85% | -1.25% | 3.50% | 0.26% | -7.31% | 0.02% | 8.55% | -0.27% | 4.06% |
XQUA.L Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D | 1.35% | 2.93% | 1.34% | 2.14% | -7.98% | -0.52% | 3.82% | 5.83% | -1.05% | -4.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMDL.L and XQUA.L is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 13, 2016 | 0.61 |
The correlation between EMDL.L and XQUA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.61 - 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
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L — Risk / Return Rank
EMDL.L
XQUA.L
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) and Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D (XQUA.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.
| EMDL.L | XQUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.34 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.25 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.20 | 1.57 | -0.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.34 | 3.97 | -0.63 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMDL.L | XQUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.08 | 1.38 | -0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 | 0.11 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.30 | 0.16 | +0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.12 | 0.15 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMDL.L drawdown since its inception was -27.54%, which is greater than XQUA.L's maximum drawdown of -20.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDL.L and XQUA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMDL.L | XQUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.54% | -20.61% | -6.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.91% | -5.80% | +0.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.91% | -8.41% | +3.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.41% | -15.01% | +6.60% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -16.87% | -20.61% | +3.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.44% | -5.45% | +2.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.41% | -9.02% | -0.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.77% | 2.30% | -0.53% |
Volatility
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) and Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D (XQUA.L) have volatilities of 2.00% and 1.97%, 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
| EMDL.L | XQUA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.00% | 1.97% | +0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.52% | 5.26% | -0.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.45% | 6.58% | -1.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.22% | 9.10% | -1.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.07% | 10.86% | -1.79% |
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMDL.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than XQUA.L's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMDL.L vs. XQUA.L - Dividend Comparison
EMDL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, more than XQUA.L's 4.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMDL.L SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF | 5.09% | 4.87% | 4.87% | 4.23% | 4.03% | 4.01% | 3.97% | 4.56% | 4.06% | 4.92% | 4.02% | 5.26% |
XQUA.L Xtrackers ESG USD Emerging Markets Bond Quality Weighted UCITS ETF 1D | 4.61% | 4.49% | 4.61% | 4.24% | 6.92% | 4.08% | 4.54% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMDL.L and XQUA.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XQUA.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XQUA.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMDL.L.
EMDL.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while XQUA.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMDL.L and 0.45% for XQUA.L.
Find the right allocation for EMDL.L and XQUA.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