PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HMEF.L vs. E127.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HMEF.L vs. E127.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) and E127.L (Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from HSBC and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMEF.L returned 5.72%/yr vs 9.22%/yr for E127.L. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. HMEF.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for E127.L.

Performance

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HMEF.L is traded in GBp, while E127.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the E127.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with HMEF.L having a 25.52% return and E127.L slightly higher at 26.18%.

HMEF.L

1D
-1.66%
1M
6.53%
YTD
25.52%
6M
27.29%
1Y
51.20%
3Y*
17.76%
5Y*
5.72%
10Y*
8.47%

E127.L

1D
-1.40%
1M
6.35%
YTD
26.18%
6M
28.72%
1Y
54.75%
3Y*
21.77%
5Y*
9.22%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		25.52%21.88%6.43%-0.16%-12.59%-4.10%24.34%
E127.L
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist		26.18%25.81%10.12%3.48%-9.65%-1.28%23.50%

Correlation

The correlation between HMEF.L and E127.L is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.99

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

0.98

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2020

0.98

The correlation between HMEF.L and E127.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HMEF.L
E127.L

Technology

42.9%
36.9%

Financial Services

17.8%
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
9.6%

Industrials

6.8%
7.5%

Communication Services

6.2%
6.9%

Basic Materials

5.9%
6.6%

Energy

3.5%
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
3.0%

Healthcare

2.6%
2.9%

Utilities

1.9%
2.1%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.0%

Technology

HMEF.L
42.9%
E127.L
36.9%

Financial Services

HMEF.L
17.8%
E127.L
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

HMEF.L
8.7%
E127.L
9.6%

Industrials

HMEF.L
6.8%
E127.L
7.5%

Communication Services

HMEF.L
6.2%
E127.L
6.9%

Basic Materials

HMEF.L
5.9%
E127.L
6.6%

Energy

HMEF.L
3.5%
E127.L
4.1%

Consumer Defensive

HMEF.L
2.7%
E127.L
3.0%

Healthcare

HMEF.L
2.6%
E127.L
2.9%

Utilities

HMEF.L
1.9%
E127.L
2.1%

Real Estate

HMEF.L
1.0%
E127.L
1.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD

Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist

Often compared with HMEF.L:
HMEF.L vs. VFEG.LHMEF.L vs. IEEM.LHMEF.L vs. AIAI.LHMEF.L vs. EMIM.LHMEF.L vs. VWRL.LHMEF.L vs. EQQQ.LHMEF.L vs. HMWO.L
Often compared with E127.L:
E127.L vs. SPXP.LE127.L vs. AEMU.LE127.L vs. FEMD.LE127.L vs. SEGM.LE127.L vs. AEME.LE127.L vs. MXFP.LE127.L vs. HEMC.L

Return for Risk

HMEF.L vs. E127.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
HMEF.L
HMEF.L Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
E127.L
E127.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
E127.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
E127.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
E127.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
E127.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
E127.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.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.

HMEF.LE127.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.99
3.25

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.88
4.14

-0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.60

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.60

5.04

-0.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.90

18.09

-2.19

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

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is comparable to the E127.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMEF.L and E127.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

HMEF.LE127.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.99

3.25

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.57

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.74

-0.47

Drawdowns

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMEF.L drawdown since its inception was -32.91%, which is greater than E127.L's maximum drawdown of -26.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMEF.L and E127.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HMEF.LE127.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.91%

-26.68%

-6.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.07%

-10.82%

-0.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.40%

-15.31%

-0.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.99%

-22.89%

-4.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.58%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.56%

-2.33%

-0.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.28%

-10.34%

-1.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.21%

3.02%

+0.19%

Volatility

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist (E127.L) have volatilities of 7.42% and 7.32%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HMEF.LE127.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.42%

7.32%

+0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.61%

14.30%

+0.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.04%

16.79%

+0.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.23%

16.18%

+0.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.92%

16.39%

+1.53%

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMEF.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than E127.L's 0.14% 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

HMEF.L vs. E127.L - Dividend Comparison

HMEF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than E127.L's 1.96% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
E127.L
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets II UCITS ETF Dist		1.96%2.47%4.04%4.40%2.79%2.25%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		0.02%0.02%0.02%0.03%0.03%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.99, HMEF.L and E127.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, E127.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

E127.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for HMEF.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for HMEF.L and 0.14% for E127.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMEF.L and E127.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