FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

FUQA.L (Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc) and EMRD.L (State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - FUQA.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Fidelity US Quality Income Index, while EMRD.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FUQA.L returned 12.29%/yr vs 7.50%/yr for EMRD.L. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FUQA.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EMRD.L.

Performance

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc (FUQA.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMRD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FUQA.L achieves a 9.57% return, which is significantly lower than EMRD.L's 19.61% return.

FUQA.L

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 0.64%
• 6M: 9.08%
• YTD: 9.57%
• 1Y: 20.00%
• 3Y*: 15.78%
• 5Y*: 12.29%
• 10Y*: —

EMRD.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -6.93%
• 6M: 13.56%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 1Y: 36.05%
• 3Y*: 19.39%
• 5Y*: 7.50%
• 10Y*: 8.87%

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

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FUQA.L Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc	9.57%	8.56%	19.50%	11.85%	-0.00%	27.82%	8.23%	27.23%	1.10%	-13.91%
EMRD.L State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	19.61%	24.62%	9.53%	4.25%	-11.24%	-1.33%	14.49%	12.91%	-8.97%	11.32%

Correlation

The correlation between FUQA.L and EMRD.L is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.47
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2017	0.51

The correlation between FUQA.L and EMRD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FUQA.L

FUQA.L Risk / Return Rank: 82
FUQA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FUQA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FUQA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FUQA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
FUQA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

EMRD.L

EMRD.L Risk / Return Rank: 61
EMRD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
EMRD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
EMRD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 60
EMRD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
EMRD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc (FUQA.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMRD.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.

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.

	FUQA.L	EMRD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	1.72	+0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	2.32	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.32	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.31	3.45	-0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.25	9.54	+3.72

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FUQA.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is comparable to the EMRD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FUQA.L and EMRD.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.

Drawdowns

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FUQA.L drawdown since its inception was -27.34%, smaller than the maximum EMRD.L drawdown of -31.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FUQA.L and EMRD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FUQA.L	EMRD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.34%	-31.27%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.01%	-10.41%	+4.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.49%	-15.26%	-5.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.49%	-22.35%	+1.86%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-10.00%	+9.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.04%	-10.35%	+3.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.51%	3.78%	-2.27%

Volatility

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc (FUQA.L) is 2.42%, while State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMRD.L) has a volatility of 9.01%. This indicates that FUQA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMRD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FUQA.L	EMRD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.42%	9.01%	-6.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.85%	18.72%	-11.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.58%	20.85%	-11.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.12%	17.68%	+1.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.35%	19.03%	+3.32%

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FUQA.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EMRD.L's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FUQA.L vs. EMRD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FUQA.L nor EMRD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FUQA.L and EMRD.L in my portfolio?

FUQA.L and EMRD.L have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FUQA.L or EMRD.L?

On fees, EMRD.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FUQA.L or EMRD.L?

EMRD.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FUQA.L.

What is the main difference between FUQA.L and EMRD.L?

FUQA.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while EMRD.L is Emerging Markets Equities. FUQA.L tracks Fidelity US Quality Income Index, while EMRD.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FUQA.L and 0.18% for EMRD.L.