PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IFFF.L vs. HMEF.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IFFF.L (iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF) and HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) are both exchange-traded funds - IFFF.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while HMEF.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IFFF.L returned 11.86%/yr vs 8.47%/yr for HMEF.L. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IFFF.L charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for HMEF.L.

Performance

IFFF.L vs. HMEF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFFF.L achieves a 37.38% return, which is significantly higher than HMEF.L's 25.52% return. Over the past 10 years, IFFF.L has outperformed HMEF.L with an annualized return of 11.86%, while HMEF.L has yielded a comparatively lower 8.47% annualized return.

IFFF.L

1D
-1.94%
1M
9.15%
YTD
37.38%
6M
39.78%
1Y
73.61%
3Y*
25.44%
5Y*
9.26%
10Y*
11.86%

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

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

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF		37.38%30.76%13.56%-4.04%-12.39%-8.11%21.66%13.62%-10.17%28.81%
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%

Correlation

The correlation between IFFF.L and HMEF.L is 0.95 - 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

0.95

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

0.95

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

0.95

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

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2011

0.95

The correlation between IFFF.L and HMEF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
IFFF.L
HMEF.L

Technology

49.8%
42.9%

Financial Services

15.3%
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
8.7%

Industrials

7.3%
6.8%

Communication Services

7.0%
6.2%

Basic Materials

2.5%
5.9%

Healthcare

2.2%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.7%
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
2.7%

Energy

1.4%
3.5%

Utilities

1.4%
1.9%

Technology

IFFF.L
49.8%
HMEF.L
42.9%

Financial Services

IFFF.L
15.3%
HMEF.L
17.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IFFF.L
9.7%
HMEF.L
8.7%

Industrials

IFFF.L
7.3%
HMEF.L
6.8%

Communication Services

IFFF.L
7.0%
HMEF.L
6.2%

Basic Materials

IFFF.L
2.5%
HMEF.L
5.9%

Healthcare

IFFF.L
2.2%
HMEF.L
2.6%

Real Estate

IFFF.L
1.7%
HMEF.L
1.0%

Consumer Defensive

IFFF.L
1.7%
HMEF.L
2.7%

Energy

IFFF.L
1.4%
HMEF.L
3.5%

Utilities

IFFF.L
1.4%
HMEF.L
1.9%

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 AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD

Often compared with IFFF.L:
IFFF.L vs. XDEW.DEIFFF.L vs. VOOIFFF.L vs. VFEA.DEIFFF.L vs. IKOR.LIFFF.L vs. ASDV.LIFFF.L vs. XKS2.LIFFF.L vs. CP9U.L
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

Return for Risk

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

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IFFF.L
IFFF.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
IFFF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
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
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.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.

IFFF.LHMEF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.81
2.99

+0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.70
3.88

+0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.67

1.55

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.09

4.60

+2.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

23.07

15.90

+7.17

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

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

The current IFFF.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.81, which is comparable to the HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFFF.L and HMEF.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

IFFF.LHMEF.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.81

2.99

+0.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.35

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

0.47

+0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.46

0.27

+0.19

Drawdowns

IFFF.L vs. HMEF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFFF.L drawdown since its inception was -53.09%, which is greater than HMEF.L's maximum drawdown of -32.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFFF.L and HMEF.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IFFF.LHMEF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-53.09%

-32.91%

-20.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.33%

-11.07%

+0.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.69%

-15.40%

-4.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.37%

-26.99%

-7.38%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.63%

-30.58%

-9.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.83%

-2.56%

-0.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.36%

-12.28%

-0.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.18%

3.21%

-0.03%

Volatility

IFFF.L vs. HMEF.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF (IFFF.L) has a higher volatility of 8.45% compared to HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) at 7.42%. This indicates that IFFF.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HMEF.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IFFF.LHMEF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.45%

7.42%

+1.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.02%

14.61%

+1.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.26%

17.04%

+2.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

16.23%

+2.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.08%

17.92%

+1.16%

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

IFFF.L has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than HMEF.L's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFFF.L vs. HMEF.L - Dividend Comparison

IFFF.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, more than HMEF.L's 0.02% 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%
IFFF.L
iShares MSCI AC Far East ex-Japan UCITS ETF		1.06%1.45%1.80%1.88%2.10%1.36%1.19%1.75%1.98%1.54%1.77%2.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.95, IFFF.L and HMEF.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, 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 0.74% for IFFF.L.

IFFF.L is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while HMEF.L is Emerging Markets Equities. IFFF.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD, while HMEF.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for IFFF.L and 0.15% for HMEF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IFFF.L and HMEF.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