EMXC.L vs. PRAM.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EMXC.L (Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc) and PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from Amundi tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMXC.L returned 28.53%/yr vs 19.95%/yr for PRAM.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMXC.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for PRAM.L.

Performance

EMXC.L vs. PRAM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

EMXC.L is traded in EUR, while PRAM.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the PRAM.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMXC.L achieves a 37.91% return, which is significantly higher than PRAM.L's 25.68% return.

EMXC.L

• 1D: -1.79%
• 1M: 7.53%
• YTD: 37.91%
• 6M: 43.53%
• 1Y: 71.47%
• 3Y*: 28.53%
• 5Y*: 12.56%
• 10Y*: —

PRAM.L

• 1D: -1.70%
• 1M: 5.45%
• YTD: 25.68%
• 6M: 27.58%
• 1Y: 47.33%
• 3Y*: 19.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMXC.L Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc	37.91%	35.24%	3.14%	18.63%	-18.80%	1.72%
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	25.68%	16.87%	14.48%	5.84%	-12.30%	0.00%

Correlation

The correlation between EMXC.L and PRAM.L is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.58

Over the past year, EMXC.L and PRAM.L have become more correlated (0.87) than their long-term average of 0.58, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors	EMXC.L	PRAM.L
Technology	45.0%	40.7%
Financial Services	19.6%	17.6%
Industrials	8.3%	8.3%
Basic Materials	6.9%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	4.5%	9.1%
Energy	4.2%	3.6%
Communication Services	3.4%	6.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	2.8%
Utilities	2.3%	2.1%
Healthcare	2.2%	2.8%
Real Estate	0.9%	1.1%

Return for Risk

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

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

EMXC.L

EMXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EMXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EMXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88

PRAM.L

PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.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.

	EMXC.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.27	2.53	+0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.13	3.38	+0.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.46	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.03	4.57	+0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.31	15.98	+3.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.27, which is comparable to the PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMXC.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMXC.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.27	2.53	+0.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.66	0.76	-0.09

Drawdowns

EMXC.L vs. PRAM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMXC.L drawdown since its inception was -40.52%, which is greater than PRAM.L's maximum drawdown of -18.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMXC.L and PRAM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMXC.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.52%	-18.29%	-22.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.14%	-10.31%	-3.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.32%	-18.29%	-2.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.84%	-3.00%	+0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.92%	-6.06%	-2.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.69%	2.95%	+0.74%

Volatility

EMXC.L vs. PRAM.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L) has a higher volatility of 9.68% compared to Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) at 7.83%. This indicates that EMXC.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PRAM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMXC.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.68%	7.83%	+1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.34%	15.63%	+3.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.79%	18.60%	+3.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.67%	19.62%	-1.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.37%	19.62%	+0.75%

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

EMXC.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than PRAM.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EMXC.L vs. PRAM.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

EMXC.L and PRAM.L have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMXC.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, EMXC.L or PRAM.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for EMXC.L.

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

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for EMXC.L and 0.10% for PRAM.L.