PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FEMD.L vs. EMV.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FEMD.L vs. EMV.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FEMD.L (Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF) and EMV.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from Fidelity and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FEMD.L returned 9.70%/yr vs 6.63%/yr for EMV.L. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FEMD.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for EMV.L.

Performance

FEMD.L vs. EMV.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 iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FEMD.L is traded in GBP, while EMV.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the EMV.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 EMV.L's 17.59% 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*
—

EMV.L

1D
-1.01%
1M
5.53%
YTD
17.59%
6M
17.45%
1Y
26.13%
3Y*
11.29%
5Y*
6.63%
10Y*
7.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMD.L vs. EMV.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%
EMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		17.59%5.04%10.84%1.45%-4.20%5.93%4.08%-4.03%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMD.L and EMV.L is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.75

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

0.80

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

0.84

The correlation between FEMD.L and EMV.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
FEMD.L
EMV.L

Technology

49.5%
32.4%

Financial Services

16.6%
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
6.7%

Industrials

7.1%
6.2%

Basic Materials

5.2%
2.9%

Energy

3.2%
3.6%

Communication Services

2.3%
11.0%

Consumer Defensive

1.9%
6.9%

Healthcare

1.8%
6.1%

Utilities

1.7%
4.7%

Real Estate

1.2%
0.6%

Technology

FEMD.L
49.5%
EMV.L
32.4%

Financial Services

FEMD.L
16.6%
EMV.L
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FEMD.L
9.6%
EMV.L
6.7%

Industrials

FEMD.L
7.1%
EMV.L
6.2%

Basic Materials

FEMD.L
5.2%
EMV.L
2.9%

Energy

FEMD.L
3.2%
EMV.L
3.6%

Communication Services

FEMD.L
2.3%
EMV.L
11.0%

Consumer Defensive

FEMD.L
1.9%
EMV.L
6.9%

Healthcare

FEMD.L
1.8%
EMV.L
6.1%

Utilities

FEMD.L
1.7%
EMV.L
4.7%

Real Estate

FEMD.L
1.2%
EMV.L
0.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF

iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF

Often compared with FEMD.L:
FEMD.L vs. VYMFEMD.L vs. FSMG.LFEMD.L vs. HEMC.LFEMD.L vs. FEMQ.LFEMD.L vs. E127.LFEMD.L vs. FSMP.LFEMD.L vs. FEM.L
Often compared with EMV.L:
EMV.L vs. CEA1.LEMV.L vs. EMIM.LEMV.L vs. NDIA.LEMV.L vs. XDEQ.LEMV.L vs. FEMQ.LEMV.L vs. ZEM.TOEMV.L vs. MXFP.L

Return for Risk

FEMD.L vs. EMV.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
EMV.L
EMV.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EMV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
EMV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. EMV.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 iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.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.LEMV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.55
2.29

+1.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.89
3.17

+1.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.66

1.43

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.42

3.28

+3.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.27

11.15

+10.12

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current FEMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.55, which is higher than the EMV.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMD.L and EMV.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.LEMV.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.55

2.29

+1.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.61

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.54

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.41

+0.18

Drawdowns

FEMD.L vs. EMV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMD.L drawdown since its inception was -27.55%, roughly equal to the maximum EMV.L drawdown of -28.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMD.L and EMV.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FEMD.LEMV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.55%

-28.68%

+1.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.95%

-7.93%

-1.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.43%

-11.19%

-3.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.26%

-11.19%

-14.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-22.59%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.02%

-1.54%

-2.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.25%

-5.90%

-2.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.70%

2.34%

+0.36%

Volatility

FEMD.L vs. EMV.L - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMD.L) has a higher volatility of 8.69% compared to iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.L) at 4.60%. This indicates that FEMD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FEMD.LEMV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.69%

4.60%

+4.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.99%

9.74%

+4.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.19%

11.37%

+4.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.06%

10.94%

+4.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.70%

13.28%

+4.42%

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

FEMD.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EMV.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEMD.L vs. EMV.L - Dividend Comparison

FEMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.73%, while EMV.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

FEMD.L and EMV.L have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EMV.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EMV.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FEMD.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FEMD.L and 0.40% for EMV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEMD.L and EMV.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