PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IEMS.L (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF) and FLXE.L (Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - IEMS.L tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap while FLXE.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IEMS.L returned 7.12%/yr vs 6.66%/yr for FLXE.L. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IEMS.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FLXE.L.

Performance

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (IEMS.L) and Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (FLXE.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

IEMS.L is traded in USD, while FLXE.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FLXE.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with IEMS.L having a 15.99% return and FLXE.L slightly lower at 15.30%.

IEMS.L

1D
-0.70%
1M
-1.03%
YTD
15.99%
6M
16.76%
1Y
29.31%
3Y*
17.49%
5Y*
7.12%
10Y*
9.32%

FLXE.L

1D
-0.68%
1M
1.92%
YTD
15.30%
6M
16.78%
1Y
32.30%
3Y*
18.97%
5Y*
6.66%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IEMS.L
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF		15.99%19.35%2.60%23.28%-18.98%19.00%18.41%10.59%-19.12%6.69%
FLXE.L
Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF		15.31%27.84%6.30%12.10%-19.33%7.47%1.39%12.31%-11.55%4.60%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMS.L and FLXE.L is 0.66, 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

0.66

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

0.68

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

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2017

0.76

The correlation between IEMS.L and FLXE.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IEMS.L
FLXE.L

Technology

22.6%
11.9%

Industrials

18.6%
9.8%

Financial Services

10.9%
21.1%

Consumer Cyclical

9.8%
9.5%

Basic Materials

9.5%
7.5%

Healthcare

9.4%
2.5%

Real Estate

6.0%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
11.8%

Communication Services

2.9%
8.7%

Utilities

2.7%
3.3%

Energy

2.3%
11.7%

Technology

IEMS.L
22.6%
FLXE.L
11.9%

Industrials

IEMS.L
18.6%
FLXE.L
9.8%

Financial Services

IEMS.L
10.9%
FLXE.L
21.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IEMS.L
9.8%
FLXE.L
9.5%

Basic Materials

IEMS.L
9.5%
FLXE.L
7.5%

Healthcare

IEMS.L
9.4%
FLXE.L
2.5%

Real Estate

IEMS.L
6.0%
FLXE.L
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

IEMS.L
5.3%
FLXE.L
11.8%

Communication Services

IEMS.L
2.9%
FLXE.L
8.7%

Utilities

IEMS.L
2.7%
FLXE.L
3.3%

Energy

IEMS.L
2.3%
FLXE.L
11.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF

Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF

Often compared with IEMS.L:
IEMS.L vs. AVEMIEMS.L vs. IEMGIEMS.L vs. HEEMIEMS.L vs. BKEMIEMS.L vs. EEMSIEMS.L vs. EMSM.LIEMS.L vs. IAAAX
Often compared with FLXE.L:
FLXE.L vs. EXXW.DEFLXE.L vs. MFEMFLXE.L vs. EMIM.LFLXE.L vs. FRIN.LFLXE.L vs. IS3N.DEFLXE.L vs. AVEMFLXE.L vs. JPGL.L

Return for Risk

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IEMS.L
IEMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
IEMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
Martin Ratio Rank
FLXE.L
FLXE.L Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FLXE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLXE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLXE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FLXE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLXE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (IEMS.L) and Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (FLXE.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.

IEMS.LFLXE.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.62
2.28

-0.66

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.34
3.25

-0.91

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.40

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.05

2.92

+0.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.31

10.25

+0.06

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

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the FLXE.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMS.L and FLXE.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

IEMS.LFLXE.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.62

2.28

-0.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.44

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.51

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

0.33

+0.20

Drawdowns

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMS.L drawdown since its inception was -49.94%, which is greater than FLXE.L's maximum drawdown of -39.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMS.L and FLXE.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IEMS.LFLXE.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-49.94%

-39.31%

-10.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.60%

-11.00%

+1.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.90%

-13.35%

-7.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.85%

-29.83%

+1.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.94%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.19%

-2.13%

-0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.38%

-11.11%

-0.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.85%

3.14%

-0.29%

Volatility

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF (IEMS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.31% compared to Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (FLXE.L) at 5.50%. This indicates that IEMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLXE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IEMS.LFLXE.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.31%

5.50%

+1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.68%

12.00%

+3.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.10%

14.10%

+4.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.45%

15.30%

+2.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.32%

16.99%

+1.33%

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMS.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FLXE.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IEMS.L vs. FLXE.L - Dividend Comparison

IEMS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.61%, while FLXE.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLXE.L
Franklin Emerging Markets UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IEMS.L
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap UCITS ETF		1.61%1.70%1.81%2.09%2.47%1.29%1.62%2.05%2.19%1.32%2.08%0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

IEMS.L and FLXE.L have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FLXE.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FLXE.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for IEMS.L.

IEMS.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap, while FLXE.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IEMS.L and 0.45% for FLXE.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IEMS.L and FLXE.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