FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L
FXC.AS (iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF) and IEEM.L (iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - FXC.AS is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China NR USD, while IEEM.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FXC.AS returned 2.88%/yr vs 10.48%/yr for IEEM.L. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FXC.AS charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IEEM.L.
Performance
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FXC.AS is traded in EUR, while IEEM.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the IEEM.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXC.AS achieves a -5.88% return, which is significantly lower than IEEM.L's 27.02% return. Over the past 10 years, FXC.AS has underperformed IEEM.L with an annualized return of 2.88%, while IEEM.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.48% annualized return.
FXC.AS
- 1D
- -2.27%
- 1M
- -2.00%
- YTD
- -5.88%
- 6M
- -7.23%
- 1Y
- 0.25%
- 3Y*
- 8.84%
- 5Y*
- -2.15%
- 10Y*
- 2.88%
IEEM.L
- 1D
- -1.43%
- 1M
- 6.42%
- YTD
- 27.02%
- 6M
- 29.34%
- 1Y
- 51.08%
- 3Y*
- 21.47%
- 5Y*
- 9.10%
- 10Y*
- 10.48%
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF | -5.88% | 13.80% | 38.37% | -15.83% | -16.25% | -13.60% | 0.80% | 15.49% | -7.49% | 18.82% |
IEEM.L iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) | 27.02% | 20.05% | 15.18% | 6.06% | -14.54% | 5.03% | 9.66% | 19.81% | -10.20% | 20.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXC.AS and IEEM.L is 0.65, 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 | 0.65 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2007 | 0.80 |
The correlation between FXC.AS and IEEM.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.80 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L — Risk / Return Rank
FXC.AS
IEEM.L
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) and iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) (IEEM.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.
| FXC.AS | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 1.52 | -0.50 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.02 | 4.66 | -4.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.03 | 16.95 | -16.91 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FXC.AS | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.01 | 2.86 | -2.84 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 | 0.54 | -0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.11 | 0.57 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.21 | 0.29 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXC.AS drawdown since its inception was -66.87%, which is greater than IEEM.L's maximum drawdown of -58.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXC.AS and IEEM.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXC.AS | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -66.87% | -58.71% | -8.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.26% | -10.91% | -4.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -27.79% | -18.06% | -9.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -47.50% | -23.45% | -24.05% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -53.92% | -31.73% | -22.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.62% | -2.60% | -21.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.62% | -12.54% | -14.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.08% | 3.01% | +4.07% |
Volatility
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF (FXC.AS) is 7.13%, while iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) (IEEM.L) has a volatility of 7.54%. This indicates that FXC.AS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEEM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXC.AS | IEEM.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.13% | 7.54% | -0.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.79% | 14.95% | -2.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.05% | 17.81% | +0.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.17% | 16.86% | +11.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.06% | 18.50% | +6.56% |
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXC.AS has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than IEEM.L's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXC.AS vs. IEEM.L - Dividend Comparison
FXC.AS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.91%, less than IEEM.L's 2.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXC.AS iShares China Large Cap UCITS ETF | 1.91% | 1.79% | 2.26% | 2.51% | 2.52% | 1.79% | 2.49% | 2.47% | 2.99% | 2.39% | 2.34% | 2.63% |
IEEM.L iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Dist) | 2.01% | 2.48% | 2.86% | 2.91% | 3.40% | 2.74% | 1.98% | 2.32% | 2.51% | 1.86% | 2.09% | 3.38% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXC.AS and IEEM.L have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IEEM.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IEEM.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FXC.AS.
FXC.AS is categorized as China Equities, while IEEM.L is Emerging Markets Equities. FXC.AS tracks MSCI China NR USD, while IEEM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FXC.AS and 0.18% for IEEM.L.
Find the right allocation for FXC.AS and IEEM.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