PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
HMEF.L vs. UB20.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) and UB20.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) are both exchange-traded funds - HMEF.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while UB20.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, HMEF.L returned 8.47%/yr vs 8.09%/yr for UB20.L. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HMEF.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for UB20.L.

Performance

HMEF.L vs. UB20.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 UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMEF.L achieves a 25.52% return, which is significantly higher than UB20.L's 8.88% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with HMEF.L having a 8.47% annualized return and UB20.L not far behind at 8.09%.

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%

UB20.L

1D
-0.89%
1M
0.41%
YTD
8.88%
6M
9.55%
1Y
17.52%
3Y*
10.59%
5Y*
6.00%
10Y*
8.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		25.52%21.88%6.43%-0.16%-12.59%-4.10%12.68%10.34%-11.43%23.56%
UB20.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		8.88%12.00%6.98%-0.60%5.80%5.29%2.35%16.21%-6.21%14.50%

Correlation

The correlation between HMEF.L and UB20.L is 0.61, 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

0.61

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

0.66

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

0.54

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 5, 2012

0.42

The correlation between HMEF.L and UB20.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (all time) to 0.66 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
HMEF.L
UB20.L

Technology

42.9%
1.1%

Financial Services

17.8%
46.1%

Consumer Cyclical

8.7%
6.0%

Industrials

6.8%
8.5%

Communication Services

6.2%
2.7%

Basic Materials

5.9%
14.6%

Energy

3.5%
2.9%

Consumer Defensive

2.7%
3.0%

Healthcare

2.6%
3.7%

Utilities

1.9%
3.6%

Real Estate

1.0%
7.8%

Technology

HMEF.L
42.9%
UB20.L
1.1%

Financial Services

HMEF.L
17.8%
UB20.L
46.1%

Consumer Cyclical

HMEF.L
8.7%
UB20.L
6.0%

Industrials

HMEF.L
6.8%
UB20.L
8.5%

Communication Services

HMEF.L
6.2%
UB20.L
2.7%

Basic Materials

HMEF.L
5.9%
UB20.L
14.6%

Energy

HMEF.L
3.5%
UB20.L
2.9%

Consumer Defensive

HMEF.L
2.7%
UB20.L
3.0%

Healthcare

HMEF.L
2.6%
UB20.L
3.7%

Utilities

HMEF.L
1.9%
UB20.L
3.6%

Real Estate

HMEF.L
1.0%
UB20.L
7.8%

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

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis

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 UB20.L:
UB20.L vs. EQQQ.LUB20.L vs. XKS2.LUB20.L vs. UC44.LUB20.L vs. FRIN.LUB20.L vs. ASDV.LUB20.L vs. IAPD.LUB20.L vs. PADV.L

Return for Risk

HMEF.L vs. UB20.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
UB20.L
UB20.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
UB20.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UB20.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
UB20.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
UB20.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
UB20.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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. UB20.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 UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.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.LUB20.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.99
1.62

+1.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.88
2.42

+1.46

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.29

+0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.60

2.46

+2.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.90

7.51

+8.40

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. UB20.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is higher than the UB20.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMEF.L and UB20.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.LUB20.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.99

1.62

+1.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.47

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.47

0.66

-0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.68

-0.41

Drawdowns

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMEF.L drawdown since its inception was -32.91%, which is greater than UB20.L's maximum drawdown of -30.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMEF.L and UB20.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

HMEF.LUB20.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.91%

-30.04%

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.07%

-7.32%

-3.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.40%

-17.80%

+2.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.99%

-17.80%

-9.19%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.58%

-30.04%

-0.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.56%

-3.03%

+0.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.28%

-5.59%

-6.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.21%

2.37%

+0.84%

Volatility

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) has a higher volatility of 7.42% compared to UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB20.L) at 3.70%. This indicates that HMEF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UB20.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

HMEF.LUB20.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.42%

3.70%

+3.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.61%

8.48%

+6.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.04%

11.12%

+5.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.23%

15.34%

+0.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.92%

18.15%

-0.23%

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMEF.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than UB20.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

HMEF.L vs. UB20.L - Dividend Comparison

HMEF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than UB20.L's 2.93% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
UB20.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Pacific (ex Japan) UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		2.93%3.86%3.26%3.97%3.64%2.60%3.05%4.03%4.36%3.43%4.00%5.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

HMEF.L and UB20.L have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HMEF.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMEF.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for UB20.L.

HMEF.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while UB20.L is Asia Pacific Equities. HMEF.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while UB20.L tracks MSCI Pacific Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for HMEF.L and 0.30% for UB20.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMEF.L and UB20.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