PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESEM.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

ESEM.L is traded in USD, while HMEF.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HMEF.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 HMEF.L's 25.22% return.


ESEM.L

1D
-1.43%
1M
4.08%
YTD
27.82%
6M
29.81%
1Y
51.85%
3Y*
23.60%
5Y*
10Y*

HMEF.L

1D
-1.61%
1M
2.41%
YTD
25.22%
6M
26.88%
1Y
48.41%
3Y*
20.79%
5Y*
4.61%
10Y*
7.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
ESEM.L
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc
27.82%33.08%5.76%9.03%-20.65%-5.82%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD
25.22%31.08%4.66%5.11%-21.94%-7.71%

Correlation

The correlation between ESEM.L and HMEF.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

0.93

The correlation between ESEM.L and HMEF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ESEM.L
HMEF.L

Technology

41.4%
42.9%

Financial Services

25.1%
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

7.7%
8.7%

Communication Services

6.2%
6.2%

Basic Materials

4.7%
5.9%

Industrials

4.5%
6.8%

Healthcare

2.7%
2.6%

Energy

2.7%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
2.7%

Utilities

1.2%
1.9%

Real Estate

0.9%
1.0%

Technology

ESEM.L
41.4%
HMEF.L
42.9%

Financial Services

ESEM.L
25.1%
HMEF.L
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ESEM.L
7.7%
HMEF.L
8.7%

Communication Services

ESEM.L
6.2%
HMEF.L
6.2%

Basic Materials

ESEM.L
4.7%
HMEF.L
5.9%

Industrials

ESEM.L
4.5%
HMEF.L
6.8%

Healthcare

ESEM.L
2.7%
HMEF.L
2.6%

Energy

ESEM.L
2.7%
HMEF.L
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

ESEM.L
2.6%
HMEF.L
2.7%

Utilities

ESEM.L
1.2%
HMEF.L
1.9%

Real Estate

ESEM.L
0.9%
HMEF.L
1.0%

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. HMEF.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

ESEM.L
ESEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
ESEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ESEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
ESEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
ESEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
ESEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

HMEF.L
HMEF.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.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 HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.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.LHMEF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.47

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.02

3.79

+0.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.05

13.67

+1.38

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ESEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ESEM.L and HMEF.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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ESEM.LHMEF.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.63

2.61

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.19

+0.23

Drawdowns

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ESEM.L drawdown since its inception was -35.55%, smaller than the maximum HMEF.L drawdown of -42.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESEM.L and HMEF.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ESEM.LHMEF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.55%

-42.58%

+7.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.94%

-13.08%

+0.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.51%

-17.13%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.48%

-2.86%

+0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.38%

-16.39%

+2.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.46%

3.63%

-0.17%

Volatility

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened UCITS ETF Acc (ESEM.L) has a higher volatility of 9.02% compared to HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) at 8.21%. This indicates that ESEM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMEF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ESEM.LHMEF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.02%

8.21%

+0.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.42%

16.33%

+1.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.87%

19.00%

+0.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.14%

18.66%

+0.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.14%

19.41%

-0.27%

ESEM.L vs. HMEF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

ESEM.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than HMEF.L's 0.15% 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. HMEF.L - Dividend Comparison

ESEM.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HMEF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ESEM.L
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets Universal Screened 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%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD
0.02%0.02%0.02%0.03%0.03%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, ESEM.L and HMEF.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, HMEF.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMEF.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ESEM.L.

ESEM.L tracks MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Universal Select Business Screens Index, while HMEF.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for ESEM.L and 0.15% for HMEF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ESEM.L and HMEF.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