EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L
EQJS.L (Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc) and IEEM.L (iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - EQJS.L is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index, while IEEM.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EQJS.L returned 8.68%/yr vs 9.54%/yr for IEEM.L. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQJS.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IEEM.L.
Performance
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EQJS.L achieves a 22.58% return, which is significantly lower than IEEM.L's 27.61% return.
EQJS.L
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 13.65%
- YTD
- 22.58%
- 6M
- 23.09%
- 1Y
- 47.91%
- 3Y*
- 19.20%
- 5Y*
- 8.68%
- 10Y*
- —
IEEM.L
- 1D
- -1.10%
- 1M
- 10.57%
- YTD
- 27.61%
- 6M
- 29.90%
- 1Y
- 58.86%
- 3Y*
- 22.16%
- 5Y*
- 9.54%
- 10Y*
- 11.91%
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQJS.L Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc | 22.58% | 12.27% | 16.78% | 8.31% | -20.39% | 10.77% |
IEEM.L iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) | 27.61% | 26.66% | 9.88% | 3.86% | -9.90% | -1.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between EQJS.L and IEEM.L is 0.63, 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 | 0.63 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 29, 2021 | 0.62 |
The correlation between EQJS.L and IEEM.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Utilities
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Energy
Real Estate
-
Technology
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Healthcare
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Consumer Cyclical
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Industrials
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Communication Services
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Utilities
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Basic Materials
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Consumer Defensive
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Financial Services
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Energy
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
Real Estate
EQJS.L
-
IEEM.L
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
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L — Risk / Return Rank
EQJS.L
IEEM.L
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L) and iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) (IEEM.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.
| EQJS.L | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.64 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.07 | 5.27 | -0.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.34 | 18.79 | -1.44 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EQJS.L | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.06 | 3.45 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 | 0.59 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.66 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 0.41 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EQJS.L drawdown since its inception was -32.10%, smaller than the maximum IEEM.L drawdown of -53.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQJS.L and IEEM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EQJS.L | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.10% | -53.22% | +21.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.40% | -11.12% | +1.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.83% | -15.47% | -9.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.10% | -23.27% | -8.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -26.63% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.36% | -1.10% | +0.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.46% | -10.41% | -3.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.75% | 3.12% | -0.37% |
Volatility
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 UCITS ETF Acc (EQJS.L) is 5.92%, while iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) (IEEM.L) has a volatility of 7.46%. This indicates that EQJS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEEM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EQJS.L | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.92% | 7.46% | -1.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.07% | 14.47% | -2.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.65% | 16.97% | -1.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.05% | 16.31% | +2.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.23% | 18.11% | +1.12% |
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EQJS.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IEEM.L's 0.18% 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
EQJS.L vs. IEEM.L - Dividend Comparison
EQJS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IEEM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQJS.L Invesco Nasdaq Next Generation 100 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% | 0.00% |
IEEM.L iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) | 1.99% | 2.48% | 2.86% | 2.91% | 3.40% | 2.74% | 1.98% | 2.32% | 2.51% | 1.86% | 2.09% | 3.38% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EQJS.L and IEEM.L have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IEEM.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IEEM.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for EQJS.L.
EQJS.L is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while IEEM.L is Emerging Markets Equities. EQJS.L tracks Nasdaq Next Generation 100 Index, while IEEM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EQJS.L and 0.18% for IEEM.L.
Find the right allocation for EQJS.L and IEEM.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