HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

HMEM.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF) and EMVL.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - HMEM.L tracks the HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF while EMVL.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HMEM.L returned 6.63%/yr vs 15.16%/yr for EMVL.L. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.40% expense ratio.

Performance

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (HMEM.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMEM.L achieves a 18.80% return, which is significantly lower than EMVL.L's 31.45% return.

HMEM.L

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -7.34%
• 6M: 12.83%
• YTD: 18.80%
• 1Y: 36.26%
• 3Y*: 19.63%
• 5Y*: 6.63%
• 10Y*: 8.77%

EMVL.L

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: -9.38%
• 6M: 23.78%
• YTD: 31.45%
• 1Y: 56.66%
• 3Y*: 31.82%
• 5Y*: 15.16%
• 10Y*: —

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

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
HMEM.L HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF	18.80%	33.60%	7.43%	8.46%	-19.69%	-3.44%	18.78%	16.40%	-2.47%
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	31.45%	43.13%	14.49%	18.37%	-16.29%	5.29%	7.72%	17.64%	-2.10%

Correlation

The correlation between HMEM.L and EMVL.L is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2018	0.93

The correlation between HMEM.L and EMVL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

HMEM.L

HMEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 63
HMEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
HMEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
HMEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 61
HMEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
HMEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 63

EMVL.L

EMVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EMVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
EMVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 86
EMVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
EMVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (HMEM.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.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.

	HMEM.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	2.37	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	2.90	-0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.41	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.82	4.51	-1.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.86	12.55	-3.69

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is lower than the EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMEM.L and EMVL.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

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMEM.L drawdown since its inception was -39.84%, which is greater than EMVL.L's maximum drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMEM.L and EMVL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	HMEM.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.84%	-34.95%	-4.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.66%	-12.49%	-0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.48%	-16.42%	-0.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.87%	-31.61%	-3.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.13%	-12.45%	+3.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.86%	-9.51%	-4.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.04%	4.50%	-0.46%

Volatility

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (HMEM.L) is 9.06%, while iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) has a volatility of 10.34%. This indicates that HMEM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMVL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HMEM.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.06%	10.34%	-1.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.78%	21.31%	-1.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.89%	23.82%	-1.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.23%	20.71%	-1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.49%	21.39%	-1.90%

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HMEM.L and EMVL.L have an expense ratio of 0.40%.

Dividends

HMEM.L vs. EMVL.L - Dividend Comparison

HMEM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, while EMVL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HMEM.L HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF	1.71%	1.95%	2.48%	2.53%	3.00%	2.06%	1.56%	2.04%	2.24%	1.55%	1.79%	2.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HMEM.L and EMVL.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, HMEM.L and EMVL.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.

Which ETF is better, HMEM.L or EMVL.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.40% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, HMEM.L or EMVL.L?

HMEM.L and EMVL.L have the same expense ratio: 0.40% per year.

What is the main difference between HMEM.L and EMVL.L?

HMEM.L tracks HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF, while EMVL.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and iShares.