PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.L) and Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FEMD.L is traded in GBP, while EMHD.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EMHD.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEMD.L achieves a 35.14% return, which is significantly higher than EMHD.L's 8.56% return.


FEMD.L

1D
-1.83%
1M
11.02%
YTD
35.14%
6M
35.25%
1Y
57.69%
3Y*
23.39%
5Y*
9.70%
10Y*

EMHD.L

1D
-0.03%
1M
-3.08%
YTD
8.56%
6M
6.60%
1Y
25.56%
3Y*
12.09%
5Y*
6.82%
10Y*
7.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
FEMD.L
Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF
35.14%20.67%6.74%9.89%-15.51%6.86%9.56%2.24%
EMHD.L
Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist
8.56%17.89%4.06%5.34%-7.42%14.77%-9.59%0.52%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMD.L and EMHD.L is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.41

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

0.57

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 12, 2019

0.65

Over the past year, the correlation between FEMD.L and EMHD.L has dropped to 0.41 - well below their long-term average of 0.65, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEMD.L
EMHD.L

Technology

49.5%
3.2%

Financial Services

16.6%
23.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
7.4%

Industrials

7.1%
10.7%

Basic Materials

5.2%
5.7%

Energy

3.2%
18.9%

Communication Services

2.3%
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

1.9%
6.7%

Healthcare

1.8%
1.7%

Utilities

1.7%
11.7%

Real Estate

1.2%
4.4%

Technology

FEMD.L
49.5%
EMHD.L
3.2%

Financial Services

FEMD.L
16.6%
EMHD.L
23.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FEMD.L
9.6%
EMHD.L
7.4%

Industrials

FEMD.L
7.1%
EMHD.L
10.7%

Basic Materials

FEMD.L
5.2%
EMHD.L
5.7%

Energy

FEMD.L
3.2%
EMHD.L
18.9%

Communication Services

FEMD.L
2.3%
EMHD.L
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

FEMD.L
1.9%
EMHD.L
6.7%

Healthcare

FEMD.L
1.8%
EMHD.L
1.7%

Utilities

FEMD.L
1.7%
EMHD.L
11.7%

Real Estate

FEMD.L
1.2%
EMHD.L
4.4%

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

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEMD.L
FEMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
FEMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
FEMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

EMHD.L
EMHD.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
EMHD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
EMHD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMHD.L 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.

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.L) and Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.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.


FEMD.LEMHD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.66

1.37

+0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.42

4.39

+2.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.27

12.40

+8.88

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.55, which is higher than the EMHD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMD.L and EMHD.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


FEMD.LEMHD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.55

2.12

+1.43

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.48

+0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.50

+0.09

Drawdowns

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMD.L drawdown since its inception was -27.55%, smaller than the maximum EMHD.L drawdown of -32.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMD.L and EMHD.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEMD.LEMHD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.55%

-32.35%

+4.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-5.78%

-3.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.43%

-12.07%

-2.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.26%

-18.33%

-6.93%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.02%

-3.87%

-0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.25%

-6.99%

-1.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.70%

2.05%

+0.65%

Volatility

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.69% compared to Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist (EMHD.L) at 3.57%. This indicates that FEMD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMHD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEMD.LEMHD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.69%

3.57%

+5.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.99%

9.04%

+4.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.19%

11.95%

+4.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.06%

14.16%

+0.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.70%

16.69%

+1.01%

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMD.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EMHD.L's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEMD.L vs. EMHD.L - Dividend Comparison

FEMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.73%, less than EMHD.L's 4.89% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EMHD.L
Invesco FTSE Emerging Markets High Dividend Low Volatility UCITS ETF Dist
4.89%5.17%5.78%5.99%9.02%6.08%4.02%5.04%5.51%4.92%2.37%
FEMD.L
Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF
2.73%3.48%3.76%3.69%3.99%3.27%2.62%0.37%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEMD.L and EMHD.L have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EMHD.L is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FEMD.L.

FEMD.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while EMHD.L tracks FTSE Emerging High Dividend Low Volatility Net Tax Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FEMD.L and 0.49% for EMHD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEMD.L and EMHD.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