PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EMIF vs. XCEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EMIF vs. XCEM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMIF tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMIF returned 2.41%/yr vs 12.62%/yr for XCEM. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMIF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.

Performance

EMIF vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMIF achieves a 1.13% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 34.20% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 2.41%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.62% annualized return.

EMIF

1D
-0.50%
1M
-2.11%
YTD
1.13%
6M
-0.46%
1Y
20.42%
3Y*
11.63%
5Y*
4.64%
10Y*
2.41%

XCEM

1D
-6.33%
1M
4.21%
YTD
34.20%
6M
36.41%
1Y
61.17%
3Y*
24.94%
5Y*
11.50%
10Y*
12.62%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMIF vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF		1.13%33.90%1.21%5.67%-12.59%3.76%-19.98%16.36%-13.70%20.70%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF		34.20%34.05%0.42%19.96%-17.59%7.87%9.47%19.74%-11.75%34.78%

Correlation

The correlation between EMIF and XCEM is 0.55, 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

0.55

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

0.56

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

0.57

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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 2, 2015

0.60

The correlation between EMIF and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMIF vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EMIF
XCEM

Industrials

42.0%
9.7%

Utilities

38.7%
1.9%

Energy

19.3%
3.8%

Basic Materials

-

6.4%

Communication Services

-

4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

-

6.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

3.0%

Financial Services

-

22.8%

Healthcare

-

2.9%

Real Estate

-

1.8%

Technology

-

37.1%

Industrials

EMIF
42.0%
XCEM
9.7%

Utilities

EMIF
38.7%
XCEM
1.9%

Energy

EMIF
19.3%
XCEM
3.8%

Basic Materials

EMIF

-

XCEM
6.4%

Communication Services

EMIF

-

XCEM
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

EMIF

-

XCEM
6.3%

Consumer Defensive

EMIF

-

XCEM
3.0%

Financial Services

EMIF

-

XCEM
22.8%

Healthcare

EMIF

-

XCEM
2.9%

Real Estate

EMIF

-

XCEM
1.8%

Technology

EMIF

-

XCEM
37.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF

Often compared with EMIF:
EMIF vs. SPYEMIF vs. IVVEMIF vs. BNEMIF vs. VDCEMIF vs. IYKEMIF vs. JXIEMIF vs. UTES
Often compared with XCEM:
XCEM vs. EMXCXCEM vs. KEMXXCEM vs. VWOXCEM vs. SPEMXCEM vs. EDIVXCEM vs. XCXCEM vs. EMGF

Return for Risk

EMIF vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EMIF
EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank
XCEM
XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

EMIF vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) 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.

EMIFXCEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.28
2.53

-1.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.88
3.12

-1.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.47

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.32

4.25

-2.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.91

16.39

-12.48

EMIF vs. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIF 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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EMIF vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMIF drawdown since its inception was -48.02%, which is greater than XCEM's maximum drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIF and XCEM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EMIFXCEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.02%

-41.24%

-6.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.57%

-14.46%

-1.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.70%

-18.92%

+2.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.29%

-29.57%

+6.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.02%

-41.24%

-6.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.97%

-6.33%

-6.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.90%

-8.57%

-7.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.24%

3.74%

+1.50%

Volatility

EMIF vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) is 5.59%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 14.01%. This indicates that EMIF 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EMIFXCEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.59%

14.01%

-8.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.43%

22.56%

-9.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.01%

24.28%

-8.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.74%

18.60%

+1.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.58%

19.94%

+0.64%

EMIF vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMIF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMIF vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

EMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.18%, more than XCEM's 2.42% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF		4.18%4.96%4.12%2.64%3.08%3.94%2.54%2.07%2.64%2.58%3.16%2.07%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF		2.42%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

EMIF and XCEM have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XCEM has higher volatility (14.01%) compared to EMIF (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 12.62% vs 2.41% for EMIF. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 12.62% return vs 2.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.18%, compared with 2.42% for XCEM.

EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMIF and 0.16% for XCEM.

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.28), 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 EMIF and XCEM

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