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

Performance

FEM vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEM achieves a 15.78% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 27.89% return. Over the past 10 years, FEM has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 8.46%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 11.12% annualized return.


FEM

1D
-1.95%
1M
-1.60%
6M
9.24%
YTD
15.78%
1Y
30.98%
3Y*
15.73%
5Y*
7.30%
10Y*
8.46%

XCEM

1D
-3.63%
1M
-5.14%
6M
21.86%
YTD
27.89%
1Y
48.38%
3Y*
21.66%
5Y*
10.56%
10Y*
11.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEM vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FEM
First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund
15.78%28.36%3.01%10.84%-14.24%7.40%-1.68%20.55%-15.51%41.05%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
27.89%34.05%0.42%19.96%-17.59%7.87%9.47%19.74%-11.75%34.78%

Correlation

The correlation between FEM and XCEM is 0.77, 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

0.77

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

0.72

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

0.75

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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 2, 2015

0.71

The correlation between FEM and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEM vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEM
XCEM

Technology

28.4%
49.5%

Industrials

19.8%
9.3%

Energy

12.9%
3.0%

Basic Materials

7.8%
5.3%

Financial Services

6.4%
17.6%

Utilities

6.1%
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

5.7%
4.8%

Communication Services

4.6%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%
2.4%

Healthcare

2.8%
2.3%

Real Estate

2.6%
1.3%

Technology

FEM
28.4%
XCEM
49.5%

Industrials

FEM
19.8%
XCEM
9.3%

Energy

FEM
12.9%
XCEM
3.0%

Basic Materials

FEM
7.8%
XCEM
5.3%

Financial Services

FEM
6.4%
XCEM
17.6%

Utilities

FEM
6.1%
XCEM
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FEM
5.7%
XCEM
4.8%

Communication Services

FEM
4.6%
XCEM
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

FEM
2.9%
XCEM
2.4%

Healthcare

FEM
2.8%
XCEM
2.3%

Real Estate

FEM
2.6%
XCEM
1.3%

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 vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEM
FEM Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
FEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
FEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

XCEM
XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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 vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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.


FEMXCEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.36

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.34

3.36

-0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.33

11.89

-1.56

FEM vs. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEM and XCEM, 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

FEM vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEM drawdown since its inception was -46.23%, which is greater than XCEM's maximum drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEM and XCEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEMXCEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.23%

-41.24%

-4.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.31%

-14.46%

+5.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.79%

-18.92%

+0.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.72%

-29.57%

-2.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.23%

-41.24%

-4.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.23%

-10.74%

+4.51%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.97%

-8.56%

-6.41%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.01%

4.08%

-1.07%

Volatility

FEM vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund (FEM) is 8.06%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 12.65%. This indicates that FEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEMXCEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.06%

12.65%

-4.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.92%

23.58%

-6.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.48%

25.21%

-5.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.76%

18.84%

-0.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.95%

19.95%

+1.00%

FEM vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEM has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEM vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

FEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, less than XCEM's 2.54% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FEM
First Trust Emerging Markets AlphaDEX Fund
2.27%3.13%3.66%4.96%6.15%4.15%2.68%3.31%3.52%2.45%2.25%3.61%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
2.54%3.25%2.76%1.22%2.42%1.94%1.63%2.11%2.70%9.56%1.24%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEM and XCEM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XCEM has higher volatility (12.65%) compared to FEM (8.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEM dropped -46.23% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 11.12% vs 8.46% for FEM. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, FEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 11.12% return vs 8.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FEM.

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.54%, compared with 2.27% for FEM.

FEM tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX EM Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FEM and 0.16% for XCEM.

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.60), 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 FEM and XCEM

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