EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMSM.L (SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF) and WLDS.L (iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMSM.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets SMID NR USD, while WLDS.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Small Cap Inde. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMSM.L returned 8.54%/yr vs 8.08%/yr for WLDS.L. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMSM.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for WLDS.L.

Performance

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (EMSM.L) and iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMSM.L achieves a 15.36% return, which is significantly higher than WLDS.L's 13.80% return.

EMSM.L

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: 2.41%
• YTD: 15.36%
• 6M: 15.54%
• 1Y: 31.12%
• 3Y*: 14.47%
• 5Y*: 8.54%
• 10Y*: 10.41%

WLDS.L

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 4.46%
• YTD: 13.80%
• 6M: 14.89%
• 1Y: 33.11%
• 3Y*: 14.85%
• 5Y*: 8.08%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMSM.L SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF	15.36%	12.15%	4.60%	15.48%	-7.03%	17.67%	16.12%	5.70%	-9.66%
WLDS.L iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF	13.80%	11.86%	8.58%	11.22%	-8.89%	16.71%	12.54%	20.41%	-4.07%

Correlation

The correlation between EMSM.L and WLDS.L is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2018	0.64

The correlation between EMSM.L and WLDS.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMSM.L	WLDS.L
Technology	22.6%	15.2%
Industrials	18.5%	20.5%
Financial Services	11.1%	13.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	10.6%
Basic Materials	9.5%	8.2%
Healthcare	9.3%	9.5%
Real Estate	6.0%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	3.9%
Communication Services	2.9%	3.0%
Utilities	2.7%	2.8%
Energy	2.3%	5.0%

Return for Risk

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMSM.L

EMSM.L Risk / Return Rank: 61
EMSM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
EMSM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
EMSM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
EMSM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
EMSM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 60

WLDS.L

WLDS.L Risk / Return Rank: 80
WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
WLDS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
WLDS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 77
WLDS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
WLDS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (EMSM.L) and iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.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.

	EMSM.L	WLDS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.62	-0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	3.69	-0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.47	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.28	4.24	-0.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.59	16.04	-5.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMSM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMSM.L and WLDS.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMSM.L	WLDS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	2.62	-0.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62	0.52	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.56	-0.11

Drawdowns

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMSM.L drawdown since its inception was -37.81%, which is greater than WLDS.L's maximum drawdown of -33.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMSM.L and WLDS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMSM.L	WLDS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.81%	-33.26%	-4.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.43%	-7.78%	-1.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.07%	-21.55%	+1.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.07%	-21.55%	+1.48%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.81%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.11%	-0.48%	-1.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.93%	-6.37%	-1.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.93%	2.06%	+0.87%

Volatility

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (EMSM.L) has a higher volatility of 6.30% compared to iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L) at 3.44%. This indicates that EMSM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WLDS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMSM.L	WLDS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.30%	3.44%	+2.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.11%	9.27%	+3.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.45%	12.59%	+2.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.82%	15.53%	-1.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.39%	17.29%	-0.90%

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMSM.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than WLDS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMSM.L vs. WLDS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EMSM.L nor WLDS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMSM.L and WLDS.L in my portfolio?

EMSM.L and WLDS.L have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMSM.L or WLDS.L?

On fees, WLDS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMSM.L or WLDS.L?

WLDS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMSM.L.

What is the main difference between EMSM.L and WLDS.L?

EMSM.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while WLDS.L is Small Cap Blend Equities. EMSM.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets SMID NR USD, while WLDS.L tracks MSCI World Small Cap Inde. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMSM.L and 0.35% for WLDS.L.