PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEM.L vs. XMEM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX UCITS ETF Acc (FEM.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEM.L achieves a 19.38% return, which is significantly lower than XMEM.L's 25.99% return. Over the past 10 years, FEM.L has underperformed XMEM.L with an annualized return of 10.14%, while XMEM.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.73% annualized return.


FEM.L

1D
-0.53%
1M
-0.64%
YTD
19.38%
6M
20.41%
1Y
41.02%
3Y*
17.20%
5Y*
8.32%
10Y*
10.14%

XMEM.L

1D
-1.54%
1M
6.19%
YTD
25.99%
6M
27.99%
1Y
53.69%
3Y*
20.58%
5Y*
8.31%
10Y*
10.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FEM.L
First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX UCITS ETF Acc
19.38%18.46%5.12%4.21%-3.80%8.72%-3.95%15.10%-11.29%27.59%
XMEM.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C
25.99%24.74%8.98%2.98%-10.70%-2.06%13.72%13.41%-9.64%25.10%

Correlation

The correlation between FEM.L and XMEM.L is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.74

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

0.74

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

0.71

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

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2013

0.82

The correlation between FEM.L and XMEM.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (5 years) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEM.L
XMEM.L

Technology

27.7%
36.9%

Industrials

20.3%
7.5%

Energy

13.1%
4.1%

Basic Materials

7.9%
6.6%

Financial Services

6.4%
19.5%

Utilities

6.0%
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
9.6%

Communication Services

4.6%
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
3.0%

Healthcare

2.8%
2.9%

Real Estate

2.6%
1.0%

Technology

FEM.L
27.7%
XMEM.L
36.9%

Industrials

FEM.L
20.3%
XMEM.L
7.5%

Energy

FEM.L
13.1%
XMEM.L
4.1%

Basic Materials

FEM.L
7.9%
XMEM.L
6.6%

Financial Services

FEM.L
6.4%
XMEM.L
19.5%

Utilities

FEM.L
6.0%
XMEM.L
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FEM.L
5.7%
XMEM.L
9.6%

Communication Services

FEM.L
4.6%
XMEM.L
6.9%

Consumer Defensive

FEM.L
2.9%
XMEM.L
3.0%

Healthcare

FEM.L
2.8%
XMEM.L
2.9%

Real Estate

FEM.L
2.6%
XMEM.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

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEM.L
FEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
FEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
FEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

XMEM.L
XMEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
XMEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX UCITS ETF Acc (FEM.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.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.


FEM.LXMEM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.58

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.87

4.87

+0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.76

17.24

+1.52

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEM.L and XMEM.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


FEM.LXMEM.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

3.14

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.54

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

0.63

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.35

0.30

+0.05

Drawdowns

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEM.L drawdown since its inception was -35.42%, smaller than the maximum XMEM.L drawdown of -54.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEM.L and XMEM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEM.LXMEM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.42%

-54.53%

+19.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.96%

-10.96%

+4.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.83%

-15.33%

-2.50%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.83%

-23.94%

+6.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.42%

-27.58%

-7.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.32%

-2.44%

+1.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.99%

-11.73%

+2.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.18%

3.10%

-0.92%

Volatility

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX UCITS ETF Acc (FEM.L) is 5.20%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) has a volatility of 7.37%. This indicates that FEM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMEM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEM.LXMEM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.20%

7.37%

-2.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.21%

14.54%

-2.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.31%

17.04%

-1.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.96%

16.89%

-0.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.68%

18.31%

+0.37%

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEM.L has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than XMEM.L's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEM.L vs. XMEM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEM.L nor XMEM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FEM.L and XMEM.L have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XMEM.L is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMEM.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FEM.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FEM.L and 0.49% for XMEM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEM.L and XMEM.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