ESEM.L vs. E127.L
ESEM.L (Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc) and E127.L (Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - ESEM.L tracks the MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Universal Select Business Screens Index while E127.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, ESEM.L returned 23.60%/yr vs 24.91%/yr for E127.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ESEM.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for E127.L.
Performance
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
ESEM.L is traded in USD, while E127.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the E127.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESEM.L achieves a 27.82% return, which is significantly higher than E127.L's 25.87% return.
ESEM.L
- 1D
- -1.43%
- 1M
- 7.41%
- YTD
- 27.82%
- 6M
- 30.89%
- 1Y
- 52.29%
- 3Y*
- 23.60%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
E127.L
- 1D
- -1.35%
- 1M
- 5.44%
- YTD
- 25.87%
- 6M
- 29.68%
- 1Y
- 53.28%
- 3Y*
- 24.91%
- 5Y*
- 8.07%
- 10Y*
- —
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESEM.L Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc | 27.82% | 33.08% | 5.76% | 9.03% | -20.65% | -5.82% |
E127.L Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist | 25.88% | 35.30% | 8.29% | 8.93% | -19.31% | -6.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESEM.L and E127.L is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2021 | 0.94 |
The correlation between ESEM.L and E127.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ESEM.L
E127.L
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Healthcare
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
ESEM.L
E127.L
Financial Services
ESEM.L
E127.L
Consumer Cyclical
ESEM.L
E127.L
Communication Services
ESEM.L
E127.L
Basic Materials
ESEM.L
E127.L
Industrials
ESEM.L
E127.L
Healthcare
ESEM.L
E127.L
Energy
ESEM.L
E127.L
Consumer Defensive
ESEM.L
E127.L
Utilities
ESEM.L
E127.L
Real Estate
ESEM.L
E127.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
ESEM.L vs. E127.L — Risk / Return Rank
ESEM.L
E127.L
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESEM.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.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.
| ESEM.L | E127.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.51 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.02 | 4.13 | -0.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.05 | 15.36 | -0.31 |
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
| ESEM.L | E127.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.63 | 2.83 | -0.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.43 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.75 | -0.32 |
Drawdowns
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESEM.L drawdown since its inception was -35.55%, smaller than the maximum E127.L drawdown of -39.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESEM.L and E127.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESEM.L | E127.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.55% | -39.30% | +3.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.94% | -12.83% | -0.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.51% | -16.10% | -0.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -36.28% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.48% | -2.64% | +0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.38% | -15.12% | +0.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.46% | 3.46% | 0.00% |
Volatility
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Volatility Comparison
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESEM.L) has a higher volatility of 9.02% compared to Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) at 8.13%. This indicates that ESEM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than E127.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ESEM.L | E127.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.02% | 8.13% | +0.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.42% | 16.08% | +1.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.87% | 18.78% | +1.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.14% | 18.63% | +0.51% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.14% | 18.69% | +0.45% |
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESEM.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than E127.L's 0.14% 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
ESEM.L vs. E127.L - Dividend Comparison
ESEM.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while E127.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E127.L Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist | 1.96% | 2.47% | 4.04% | 4.40% | 2.79% | 2.25% |
ESEM.L Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, ESEM.L and E127.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.
On fees, E127.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
E127.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ESEM.L.
ESEM.L tracks MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Universal Select Business Screens Index, while E127.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESEM.L and 0.14% for E127.L.
Find the right allocation for ESEM.L and E127.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