PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EXCS.L vs. UC79.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026
Documentation

EXCS.L (iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and UC79.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from iShares and UBS respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EXCS.L returned 22.90%/yr vs 22.56%/yr for UC79.L. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EXCS.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for UC79.L.

Performance

EXCS.L vs. UC79.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 UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EXCS.L is traded in GBP, while UC79.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the UC79.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EXCS.L achieves a 30.49% return, which is significantly higher than UC79.L's 26.86% return.

EXCS.L

1D
-1.75%
1M
-7.82%
6M
23.99%
YTD
30.49%
1Y
51.35%
3Y*
22.90%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

UC79.L

1D
-1.03%
1M
-6.97%
6M
22.39%
YTD
26.86%
1Y
43.86%
3Y*
22.56%
5Y*
8.99%
10Y*
8.59%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
EXCS.L
iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)		30.49%26.23%5.43%11.04%-8.40%-25.31%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		26.86%26.95%10.88%1.14%-11.74%-3.82%

Correlation

The correlation between EXCS.L and UC79.L is 0.91, 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

0.91

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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2021

0.82

The correlation between EXCS.L and UC79.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EXCS.L
UC79.L

Technology

53.4%
45.8%

Financial Services

18.0%
19.3%

Industrials

6.5%
6.2%

Basic Materials

5.5%
2.7%

Consumer Cyclical

3.8%
9.9%

Energy

3.1%
0.1%

Communication Services

2.9%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
2.6%

Healthcare

1.9%
3.0%

Utilities

1.8%
1.0%

Real Estate

0.8%
1.2%

Technology

EXCS.L
53.4%
UC79.L
45.8%

Financial Services

EXCS.L
18.0%
UC79.L
19.3%

Industrials

EXCS.L
6.5%
UC79.L
6.2%

Basic Materials

EXCS.L
5.5%
UC79.L
2.7%

Consumer Cyclical

EXCS.L
3.8%
UC79.L
9.9%

Energy

EXCS.L
3.1%
UC79.L
0.1%

Communication Services

EXCS.L
2.9%
UC79.L
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

EXCS.L
2.4%
UC79.L
2.6%

Healthcare

EXCS.L
1.9%
UC79.L
3.0%

Utilities

EXCS.L
1.8%
UC79.L
1.0%

Real Estate

EXCS.L
0.8%
UC79.L
1.2%

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 EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis

Often compared with EXCS.L:
EXCS.L vs. EMIM.LEXCS.L vs. EIMI.LEXCS.L vs. XDEM.LEXCS.L vs. QQQEXCS.L vs. EEMEXCS.L vs. VFEG.LEXCS.L vs. ^GSPC
Often compared with UC79.L:
UC79.L vs. HMEF.LUC79.L vs. EMV.LUC79.L vs. COPPUC79.L vs. EUFM.LUC79.L vs. 5ESG.LUC79.L vs. V3AB.LUC79.L vs. HDEM.L

Return for Risk

EXCS.L vs. UC79.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: 8585
Overall Rank
EXCS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EXCS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
EXCS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EXCS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
EXCS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
UC79.L
UC79.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
UC79.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UC79.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
UC79.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
UC79.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
UC79.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.

EXCS.L vs. UC79.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 UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.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.

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.

EXCS.LUC79.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.28
2.15

+0.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.88
2.83

+0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.39

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.20

4.29

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.89

12.36

+0.53

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EXCS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the UC79.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EXCS.L and UC79.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...

Drawdowns

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EXCS.L drawdown since its inception was -35.01%, smaller than the maximum UC79.L drawdown of -53.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EXCS.L and UC79.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EXCS.LUC79.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.01%

-53.04%

+18.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.16%

-10.19%

-1.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.79%

-16.57%

-5.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-23.02%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-31.53%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.16%

-10.19%

-1.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.67%

-20.89%

+0.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.97%

3.54%

+0.43%

Volatility

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.L) has a higher volatility of 10.78% compared to UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC79.L) at 8.84%. This indicates that EXCS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UC79.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EXCS.LUC79.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.78%

8.84%

+1.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.54%

18.11%

+2.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

22.44%

20.32%

+2.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.53%

17.58%

+6.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.53%

18.56%

+5.97%

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EXCS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than UC79.L's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

EXCS.L vs. UC79.L - Dividend Comparison

EXCS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UC79.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EXCS.L
iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (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%
UC79.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets Socially Responsible UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		1.67%2.14%1.79%2.38%2.07%1.35%1.80%2.11%2.11%1.97%2.15%1.60%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.91, EXCS.L and UC79.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, EXCS.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EXCS.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for UC79.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EXCS.L and 0.27% for UC79.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EXCS.L and UC79.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