FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FSEM.L (Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc) and SBEM.L (UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. FSEM.L is actively managed, while SBEM.L is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FSEM.L returned 1.53%/yr vs 2.38%/yr for SBEM.L. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FSEM.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for SBEM.L.

Performance

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc (FSEM.L) and UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (SBEM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

FSEM.L is traded in USD, while SBEM.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SBEM.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSEM.L achieves a 2.90% return, which is significantly higher than SBEM.L's 2.23% return.

FSEM.L

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 2.90%
• 6M: 3.45%
• 1Y: 12.53%
• 3Y*: 8.81%
• 5Y*: 1.53%
• 10Y*: —

SBEM.L

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 1.48%
• YTD: 2.23%
• 6M: 3.54%
• 1Y: 13.46%
• 3Y*: 11.48%
• 5Y*: 2.38%
• 10Y*: 3.79%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FSEM.L Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc	2.90%	13.32%	3.51%	8.82%	-17.90%	2.49%
SBEM.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	2.23%	15.52%	7.63%	11.53%	-19.84%	2.97%

Correlation

The correlation between FSEM.L and SBEM.L is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 30, 2021	0.61

The correlation between FSEM.L and SBEM.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (1 year) to 0.62 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSEM.L

FSEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 67
FSEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FSEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
FSEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 78
FSEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
FSEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 63

SBEM.L

SBEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 71
SBEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
SBEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
SBEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
SBEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
SBEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc (FSEM.L) and UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (SBEM.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.

	FSEM.L	SBEM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	2.08	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	3.01	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.37	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	2.79	+0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.25	12.72	-1.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is comparable to the SBEM.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSEM.L and SBEM.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FSEM.L	SBEM.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.96	2.08	-0.12
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	0.25	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.36	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	0.43	-0.20

Drawdowns

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSEM.L drawdown since its inception was -28.00%, smaller than the maximum SBEM.L drawdown of -30.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSEM.L and SBEM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSEM.L	SBEM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.00%	-30.77%	+2.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.02%	-4.80%	+0.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.09%	-7.12%	+0.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.00%	-30.77%	+2.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.00%	0.00%	-1.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.21%	-6.47%	-3.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	1.06%	+0.05%

Volatility

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc (FSEM.L) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (SBEM.L) at 1.98%. This indicates that FSEM.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SBEM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSEM.L	SBEM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.72%	1.98%	+0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.22%	5.01%	+0.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.39%	6.47%	-0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.58%	9.44%	-0.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.47%	10.50%	-2.03%

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSEM.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than SBEM.L's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSEM.L vs. SBEM.L - Dividend Comparison

FSEM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.90%, more than SBEM.L's 6.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FSEM.L Fidelity Sustainable USD EM Bond UCITS ETF Inc	7.90%	6.31%	6.49%	5.74%	5.01%	2.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SBEM.L UBS ETF (LU) Bloomberg USD Emerging Markets Sovereign UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis	6.53%	7.69%	6.28%	6.49%	5.72%	4.35%	4.92%	4.83%	4.47%	4.84%	2.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSEM.L and SBEM.L in my portfolio?

FSEM.L and SBEM.L have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FSEM.L or SBEM.L?

On fees, SBEM.L is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSEM.L or SBEM.L?

SBEM.L is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FSEM.L.

What is the main difference between FSEM.L and SBEM.L?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FSEM.L and 0.42% for SBEM.L.