PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEMQ.L achieves a 34.78% return, which is significantly higher than PRAM.L's 24.77% return.


FEMQ.L

1D
-1.83%
1M
10.66%
YTD
34.78%
6M
35.19%
1Y
57.18%
3Y*
23.41%
5Y*
9.81%
10Y*

PRAM.L

1D
-1.56%
1M
5.71%
YTD
24.77%
6M
26.35%
1Y
51.29%
3Y*
20.13%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FEMQ.L
Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF
34.78%20.96%6.49%9.64%-15.02%0.21%
PRAM.L
Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)
24.77%23.16%9.01%3.99%-8.64%0.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMQ.L and PRAM.L is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021

0.62

The correlation between FEMQ.L and PRAM.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (all time) to 0.82 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEMQ.L
PRAM.L

Technology

49.5%
40.7%

Financial Services

16.6%
17.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
9.1%

Industrials

7.1%
8.3%

Basic Materials

5.2%
5.8%

Energy

3.2%
3.6%

Communication Services

2.3%
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

1.9%
2.8%

Healthcare

1.8%
2.8%

Utilities

1.7%
2.1%

Real Estate

1.2%
1.1%

Technology

FEMQ.L
49.5%
PRAM.L
40.7%

Financial Services

FEMQ.L
16.6%
PRAM.L
17.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FEMQ.L
9.6%
PRAM.L
9.1%

Industrials

FEMQ.L
7.1%
PRAM.L
8.3%

Basic Materials

FEMQ.L
5.2%
PRAM.L
5.8%

Energy

FEMQ.L
3.2%
PRAM.L
3.6%

Communication Services

FEMQ.L
2.3%
PRAM.L
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

FEMQ.L
1.9%
PRAM.L
2.8%

Healthcare

FEMQ.L
1.8%
PRAM.L
2.8%

Utilities

FEMQ.L
1.7%
PRAM.L
2.1%

Real Estate

FEMQ.L
1.2%
PRAM.L
1.1%

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

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

PRAM.L
PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.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.


FEMQ.LPRAM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.68

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.67

1.52

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.48

4.98

+1.50

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.32

16.58

+4.74

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.52, which is comparable to the PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMQ.L and PRAM.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


FEMQ.LPRAM.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.52

2.84

+0.68

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.49

0.82

-0.33

Drawdowns

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMQ.L drawdown since its inception was -28.13%, which is greater than PRAM.L's maximum drawdown of -15.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMQ.L and PRAM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEMQ.LPRAM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.13%

-15.77%

-12.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.78%

-10.26%

+1.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.75%

-15.77%

+1.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.07%

-2.78%

-1.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.03%

-4.79%

-3.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.67%

3.08%

-0.41%

Volatility

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) has a higher volatility of 9.03% compared to Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) at 7.80%. This indicates that FEMQ.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PRAM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEMQ.LPRAM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.03%

7.80%

+1.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.19%

15.43%

-1.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.18%

18.02%

-1.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.00%

18.89%

-3.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.50%

18.89%

-1.39%

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMQ.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PRAM.L's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEMQ.L vs. PRAM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEMQ.L nor PRAM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FEMQ.L and PRAM.L have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, PRAM.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FEMQ.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FEMQ.L and 0.10% for PRAM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEMQ.L and PRAM.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