EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EXCS.L (iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and FEMQ.L (Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from iShares and Fidelity respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EXCS.L returned 26.11%/yr vs 24.30%/yr for FEMQ.L. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EXCS.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEMQ.L.

Performance

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EXCS.L achieves a 41.08% return, which is significantly higher than FEMQ.L's 37.29% return.

EXCS.L

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: 13.86%
• YTD: 41.08%
• 6M: 45.00%
• 1Y: 77.57%
• 3Y*: 26.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEMQ.L

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 14.59%
• YTD: 37.29%
• 6M: 37.50%
• 1Y: 61.42%
• 3Y*: 24.30%
• 5Y*: 10.22%
• 10Y*: —

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

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EXCS.L iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	41.08%	26.13%	5.55%	10.95%	-8.31%	2.81%
FEMQ.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF	37.29%	20.96%	6.49%	9.64%	-15.02%	1.54%

Correlation

The correlation between EXCS.L and FEMQ.L is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2021	0.82

The correlation between EXCS.L and FEMQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EXCS.L	FEMQ.L
Technology	45.1%	49.5%
Financial Services	19.5%	16.6%
Industrials	8.3%	7.1%
Basic Materials	6.8%	5.2%
Consumer Cyclical	4.5%	9.6%
Energy	4.2%	3.2%
Communication Services	3.4%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	1.9%
Utilities	2.3%	1.7%
Healthcare	2.2%	1.8%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.2%

Return for Risk

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EXCS.L

EXCS.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
EXCS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EXCS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EXCS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EXCS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
EXCS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 92

FEMQ.L

FEMQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FEMQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
FEMQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FEMQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.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.

	EXCS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.11	3.81	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.03	5.25	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.74	1.73	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.54	6.96	-0.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.94	23.01	+0.93
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EXCS.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.11, which is comparable to the FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EXCS.L and FEMQ.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

	EXCS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.11	3.81	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.06	0.50	+0.55

Drawdowns

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EXCS.L drawdown since its inception was -17.51%, smaller than the maximum FEMQ.L drawdown of -28.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EXCS.L and FEMQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EXCS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.51%	-28.13%	+10.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.81%	-8.78%	-3.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.51%	-14.75%	-2.76%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.31%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-2.28%	+1.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.85%	-8.03%	+3.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.23%	2.66%	+0.57%

Volatility

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) have volatilities of 8.68% and 8.75%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EXCS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.68%	8.75%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.44%	14.04%	+2.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.79%	16.06%	+2.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.35%	14.98%	+0.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.35%	17.49%	-2.14%

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EXCS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than FEMQ.L's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

EXCS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EXCS.L nor FEMQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EXCS.L and FEMQ.L in my portfolio?

EXCS.L and FEMQ.L have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EXCS.L or FEMQ.L?

On fees, EXCS.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EXCS.L or FEMQ.L?

EXCS.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FEMQ.L.

What is the main difference between EXCS.L and FEMQ.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EXCS.L and 0.50% for FEMQ.L.