PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.L) and Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc (MXFS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMHD.L achieves a 8.13% return, which is significantly lower than MXFS.L's 25.90% return. Over the past 10 years, EMHD.L has underperformed MXFS.L with an annualized return of 7.13%, while MXFS.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.25% annualized return.


EMHD.L

1D
-0.03%
1M
-3.96%
YTD
8.13%
6M
7.34%
1Y
24.35%
3Y*
14.98%
5Y*
5.68%
10Y*
7.13%

MXFS.L

1D
-1.64%
1M
5.43%
YTD
25.90%
6M
29.15%
1Y
52.52%
3Y*
23.85%
5Y*
7.19%
10Y*
10.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMHD.L
Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist
8.13%26.93%2.28%10.88%-17.26%13.69%-6.85%15.04%-6.42%25.33%
MXFS.L
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc
25.90%33.98%7.21%7.99%-19.20%-3.47%18.07%19.21%-15.38%35.57%

Correlation

The correlation between EMHD.L and MXFS.L is 0.65, 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

0.65

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

0.74

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

0.72

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2016

0.73

The correlation between EMHD.L and MXFS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMHD.L
MXFS.L

Financial Services

23.6%
20.3%

Energy

18.9%
3.8%

Utilities

11.7%
2.3%

Industrials

10.7%
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

7.4%
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%
3.1%

Communication Services

6.0%
6.9%

Basic Materials

5.7%
7.2%

Real Estate

4.4%
1.1%

Technology

3.2%
35.4%

Healthcare

1.7%
3.0%

Financial Services

EMHD.L
23.6%
MXFS.L
20.3%

Energy

EMHD.L
18.9%
MXFS.L
3.8%

Utilities

EMHD.L
11.7%
MXFS.L
2.3%

Industrials

EMHD.L
10.7%
MXFS.L
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EMHD.L
7.4%
MXFS.L
9.3%

Consumer Defensive

EMHD.L
6.7%
MXFS.L
3.1%

Communication Services

EMHD.L
6.0%
MXFS.L
6.9%

Basic Materials

EMHD.L
5.7%
MXFS.L
7.2%

Real Estate

EMHD.L
4.4%
MXFS.L
1.1%

Technology

EMHD.L
3.2%
MXFS.L
35.4%

Healthcare

EMHD.L
1.7%
MXFS.L
3.0%

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

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMHD.L
EMHD.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
EMHD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

MXFS.L
MXFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
MXFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MXFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
MXFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
MXFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
MXFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.L) and Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc (MXFS.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.


EMHD.LMXFS.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.48

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.89

4.10

-0.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.79

15.00

-4.21

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMHD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is comparable to the MXFS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMHD.L and MXFS.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMHD.LMXFS.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.96

2.65

-0.69

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

0.39

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.43

0.55

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.32

+0.13

Drawdowns

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMHD.L drawdown since its inception was -38.32%, roughly equal to the maximum MXFS.L drawdown of -39.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMHD.L and MXFS.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMHD.LMXFS.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.32%

-39.81%

+1.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.20%

-12.76%

+6.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.97%

-16.92%

+2.95%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.43%

-37.18%

+6.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.32%

-39.78%

+1.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.89%

-2.80%

-2.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.75%

-15.32%

+5.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.25%

3.49%

-1.24%

Volatility

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.L) is 3.77%, while Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc (MXFS.L) has a volatility of 8.67%. This indicates that EMHD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MXFS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMHD.LMXFS.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.77%

8.67%

-4.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.33%

17.03%

-7.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.32%

19.77%

-7.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.04%

19.62%

-4.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.85%

20.62%

-3.77%

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMHD.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than MXFS.L's 0.19% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMHD.L vs. MXFS.L - Dividend Comparison

EMHD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.89%, while MXFS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMHD.L
Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist
4.89%5.17%5.78%5.99%9.02%6.08%4.02%5.04%5.51%4.92%2.37%
MXFS.L
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMHD.L and MXFS.L have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MXFS.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MXFS.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMHD.L.

EMHD.L tracks FTSE Emerging High Dividend Low Volatility Net Tax Index, while MXFS.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Total Return (Net) Index. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EMHD.L and 0.19% for MXFS.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMHD.L and MXFS.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