EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

EMMV.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMMV.L tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index (Net) while PRAM.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMMV.L returned 11.83%/yr vs 18.95%/yr for PRAM.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMMV.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for PRAM.L.

Performance

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMMV.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMMV.L achieves a 12.47% return, which is significantly lower than PRAM.L's 15.46% return.

EMMV.L

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -6.70%
• 6M: 8.62%
• YTD: 12.47%
• 1Y: 16.51%
• 3Y*: 11.83%
• 5Y*: 5.22%
• 10Y*: 5.62%
• ALL TIME*: 4.06%

PRAM.L

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: -9.04%
• 6M: 9.25%
• YTD: 15.46%
• 1Y: 30.19%
• 3Y*: 18.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.23%

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

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMMV.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	12.47%	12.62%	8.30%	8.03%	-14.19%	0.32%
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	15.46%	32.60%	7.09%	9.87%	-17.96%	-0.87%

Correlation

The correlation between EMMV.L and PRAM.L is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 20, 2021	0.84

The correlation between EMMV.L and PRAM.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMMV.L	PRAM.L
Technology	37.3%	44.6%
Financial Services	18.2%	17.5%
Communication Services	10.1%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	6.7%	7.7%
Industrials	5.8%	7.6%
Healthcare	5.5%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	2.6%
Utilities	4.2%	2.0%
Energy	3.5%	3.1%
Basic Materials	2.6%	5.3%
Real Estate	0.6%	1.0%

Return for Risk

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMMV.L

EMMV.L Risk / Return Rank: 43
EMMV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
EMMV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
EMMV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 43
EMMV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
EMMV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 45

PRAM.L

PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 57
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMMV.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.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.

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.

	EMMV.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.39	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.59	1.93	-0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.26	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	2.40	-0.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.34	7.26	-1.92

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMMV.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is comparable to the PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMMV.L and PRAM.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.

Drawdowns

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMMV.L drawdown since its inception was -32.15%, roughly equal to the maximum PRAM.L drawdown of -31.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMMV.L and PRAM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMMV.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.15%	-31.21%	-0.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.71%	-12.51%	+2.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.41%	-16.74%	+4.33%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.34%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.71%	-10.50%	+2.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.54%	-10.59%	+2.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.09%	4.15%	-1.06%

Volatility

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMMV.L) is 6.25%, while Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) has a volatility of 8.92%. This indicates that EMMV.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PRAM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMMV.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.25%	8.92%	-2.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.76%	19.53%	-5.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.05%	21.63%	-6.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.07%	18.65%	-5.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.07%	18.65%	-4.58%

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMMV.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than PRAM.L's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMMV.L vs. PRAM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EMMV.L nor PRAM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMMV.L and PRAM.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, EMMV.L and PRAM.L 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 ETF is better, EMMV.L or PRAM.L?

On fees, PRAM.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMMV.L or PRAM.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EMMV.L.

What is the main difference between EMMV.L and PRAM.L?

EMMV.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index (Net), while PRAM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for EMMV.L and 0.10% for PRAM.L.