EMGF vs. XCEM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EMGF (iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMGF tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMGF returned 11.88%/yr vs 13.36%/yr for XCEM. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMGF charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.

Performance

EMGF vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMGF achieves a 32.97% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 43.27% return. Over the past 10 years, EMGF has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 11.88%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 13.36% annualized return.

EMGF

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 8.68%
• YTD: 32.97%
• 6M: 34.74%
• 1Y: 55.99%
• 3Y*: 27.87%
• 5Y*: 11.39%
• 10Y*: 11.88%

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%

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

EMGF vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	32.97%	31.41%	9.06%	10.86%	-16.55%	6.65%	10.27%	20.96%	-19.71%	42.37%
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 EMGF and XCEM is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2015	0.78

The correlation between EMGF and XCEM shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.94 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMGF vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMGF	XCEM
Technology	41.4%	37.1%
Financial Services	17.4%	22.8%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	6.3%
Industrials	7.2%	9.7%
Communication Services	6.5%	4.2%
Basic Materials	5.3%	6.4%
Energy	3.6%	3.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	3.0%
Healthcare	2.4%	2.9%
Utilities	2.3%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.8%

Return for Risk

EMGF vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMGF

EMGF Risk / Return Rank: 81
EMGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
EMGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
EMGF Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EMGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EMGF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 90
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

EMGF vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) 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.

	EMGF	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	3.17	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	3.88	-0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.57	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.16	5.13	-0.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.36	19.88	-4.51

EMGF vs. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMGF Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMGF and XCEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMGF vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMGF drawdown since its inception was -40.23%, roughly equal to the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMGF and XCEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMGF	XCEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.23%	-41.24%	+1.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.54%	-14.46%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.65%	-18.92%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.20%	-29.57%	+1.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.23%	-41.24%	+1.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.02%	-8.57%	-1.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	3.72%	-0.06%

Volatility

EMGF vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) is 11.17%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 12.12%. This indicates that EMGF 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.

Volatility by Period

	EMGF	XCEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.17%	12.12%	-0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.89%	21.53%	-1.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.01%	23.42%	-1.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.18%	18.38%	-0.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.63%	19.91%	-0.28%

EMGF vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMGF has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMGF vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

EMGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, less than XCEM's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF	1.89%	2.52%	3.42%	5.94%	4.04%	2.48%	1.95%	2.63%	2.73%	1.94%	2.04%	0.00%
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

Can I hold both EMGF and XCEM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, EMGF and XCEM 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.

Which is riskier, EMGF or XCEM?

XCEM has higher volatility (12.12%) compared to EMGF (11.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMGF dropped -40.23% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

Which ETF is better, EMGF or XCEM?

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 13.36% vs 11.88% for EMGF. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, EMGF has been the lower-risk option at 11.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMGF or XCEM?

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 13.36% return vs 11.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMGF or XCEM?

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for EMGF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMGF or XCEM?

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 1.89% for EMGF.

What is the main difference between EMGF and XCEM?

EMGF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EMGF and 0.16% for XCEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.56), 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.