PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EWM vs. XME
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EWM vs. XME

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EWM (iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF) and XME (SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWM is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Malaysia Index, while XME is a Materials fund tracking the S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EWM returned 2.79%/yr vs 19.60%/yr for XME. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EWM charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XME.

Performance

EWM vs. XME - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) and SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EWM achieves a 2.89% return, which is significantly lower than XME's 16.32% return. Over the past 10 years, EWM has underperformed XME with an annualized return of 2.79%, while XME has yielded a comparatively higher 19.60% annualized return.

EWM

1D
0.25%
1M
-6.82%
YTD
2.89%
6M
6.00%
1Y
19.03%
3Y*
14.97%
5Y*
4.69%
10Y*
2.79%

XME

1D
1.77%
1M
-2.35%
YTD
16.32%
6M
18.13%
1Y
86.41%
3Y*
35.23%
5Y*
21.78%
10Y*
19.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EWM vs. XME - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EWM
iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF		2.89%15.74%19.46%-3.61%-6.00%-7.40%3.12%-1.41%-6.28%24.25%
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF		16.32%83.47%-4.54%21.51%13.13%34.92%15.95%14.69%-26.78%21.17%

Correlation

The correlation between EWM and XME is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.37

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.40

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2006

0.49

The correlation between EWM and XME shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (3 years) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EWM vs. XME - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EWM
XME

Financial Services

46.6%

-

Industrials

11.1%
0.4%

Utilities

10.8%

-

Basic Materials

8.9%
75.3%

Consumer Defensive

7.3%
0.8%

Communication Services

6.6%

-

Energy

3.9%
23.4%

Healthcare

3.8%

-

Consumer Cyclical

1.1%

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

2.2%

Financial Services

EWM
46.6%
XME

-

Industrials

EWM
11.1%
XME
0.4%

Utilities

EWM
10.8%
XME

-

Basic Materials

EWM
8.9%
XME
75.3%

Consumer Defensive

EWM
7.3%
XME
0.8%

Communication Services

EWM
6.6%
XME

-

Energy

EWM
3.9%
XME
23.4%

Healthcare

EWM
3.8%
XME

-

Consumer Cyclical

EWM
1.1%
XME

-

Real Estate

EWM

-

XME

-

Technology

EWM

-

XME
2.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF

SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF

Often compared with EWM:
EWM vs. EIDOEWM vs. EWYEWM vs. EWTEWM vs. EPIEWM vs. AAXJEWM vs. VOOEWM vs. SCHD
Often compared with XME:
XME vs. PICKXME vs. SETMXME vs. SLXXME vs. XBM.TOXME vs. VAWXME vs. VOOXME vs. QQQ

Return for Risk

EWM vs. XME — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EWM
EWM Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
EWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWM Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
EWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4848
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWM Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank
XME
XME Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
XME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XME Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
XME Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
XME Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
XME Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

EWM vs. XME - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) and SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

EWMXMEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.36
2.41

-1.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.92
2.86

-0.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.37

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.09

3.84

-1.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.65

9.58

-2.93

EWM vs. XME - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EWM Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the XME Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EWM and XME, 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...

Drawdowns

EWM vs. XME - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EWM drawdown since its inception was -89.19%, roughly equal to the maximum XME drawdown of -85.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWM and XME.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EWMXMEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-89.19%

-85.89%

-3.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.14%

-22.60%

+13.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.31%

-30.47%

+9.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.76%

-37.27%

+14.51%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.81%

-61.69%

+17.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.08%

-9.33%

+0.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-31.80%

-44.09%

+12.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.87%

9.05%

-6.18%

Volatility

EWM vs. XME - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF (EWM) is 3.97%, while SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) has a volatility of 15.26%. This indicates that EWM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XME based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EWMXMEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.97%

15.26%

-11.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.95%

28.51%

-17.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.10%

36.11%

-22.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.72%

32.84%

-19.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.27%

32.96%

-16.69%

EWM vs. XME - Expense Ratio Comparison

EWM has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than XME's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EWM vs. XME - Dividend Comparison

EWM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.32%, more than XME's 0.32% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWM
iShares MSCI Malaysia ETF		3.32%3.41%3.32%3.47%3.00%6.48%1.89%2.91%3.84%5.58%5.97%37.54%
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF		0.32%0.38%0.65%1.00%1.64%0.70%0.99%2.43%2.23%1.15%1.02%2.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

EWM and XME have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XME has higher volatility (15.26%) compared to EWM (3.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWM dropped -89.19% vs XME's -85.89%.

On 10-year performance, XME leads with 19.60% vs 2.79% for EWM. On fees, XME is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EWM has been the lower-risk option at 3.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XME has performed better with a 19.60% return vs 2.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XME is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EWM.

EWM has the higher dividend yield at 3.32%, compared with 0.32% for XME.

EWM is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XME is Materials. EWM tracks MSCI Malaysia Index, while XME tracks S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWM and 0.35% for XME.

XME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.36), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EWM and XME

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