IXC vs. EMEQ

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

IXC (iShares Global Energy ETF) and EMEQ (Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IXC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Global 1200 Energy Capped Index, while EMEQ is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Nomura. IXC is passively managed, while EMEQ is actively managed. Over the past year, IXC returned 29.02% vs 127.62% for EMEQ. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IXC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for EMEQ.

Performance

IXC vs. EMEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IXC achieves a 23.35% return, which is significantly lower than EMEQ's 70.04% return.

IXC

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -4.24%
• 6M: 20.68%
• YTD: 23.35%
• 1Y: 29.02%
• 3Y*: 14.69%
• 5Y*: 18.91%
• 10Y*: 8.83%

EMEQ

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.76%
• 6M: 58.06%
• YTD: 70.04%
• 1Y: 127.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IXC vs. EMEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	23.35%	13.98%	-3.46%
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	70.04%	69.78%	-0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between IXC and EMEQ is -0.00, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.13

The correlation between IXC and EMEQ shifts across timeframes, from -0.00 (1 year) to 0.13 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IXC vs. EMEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IXC	EMEQ
Energy	99.4%	2.9%
Utilities	0.2%	0.9%
Basic Materials	-	1.6%
Communication Services	-	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.6%
Financial Services	-	14.4%
Healthcare	-	0.9%
Industrials	-	6.4%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	54.6%

Return for Risk

IXC vs. EMEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

IXC

IXC Risk / Return Rank: 51
IXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
IXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
IXC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
IXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
IXC Martin Ratio Rank: 47

EMEQ

EMEQ Risk / Return Rank: 94
EMEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EMEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 93
EMEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EMEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

IXC vs. EMEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) and Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ). 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.

	IXC	EMEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	3.27	-1.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	3.47	-1.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.51	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	6.98	-5.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.26	23.27	-17.01

IXC vs. EMEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IXC Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is lower than the EMEQ Sharpe Ratio of 3.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IXC and EMEQ, 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

IXC vs. EMEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IXC drawdown since its inception was -67.88%, which is greater than EMEQ's maximum drawdown of -19.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IXC and EMEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	IXC	EMEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.88%	-19.99%	-47.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.36%	-17.91%	+2.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-64.16%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.22%	-12.48%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.45%	-4.19%	-13.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.78%	5.36%	-0.58%

Volatility

IXC vs. EMEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Energy ETF (IXC) is 6.59%, while Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF (EMEQ) has a volatility of 18.22%. This indicates that IXC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IXC	EMEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.59%	18.22%	-11.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.86%	35.48%	-19.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.18%	38.20%	-19.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.45%	33.24%	-9.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.81%	33.24%	-6.43%

IXC vs. EMEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IXC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than EMEQ's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

IXC vs. EMEQ - Dividend Comparison

IXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.08%, more than EMEQ's 1.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMEQ Nomura Focused Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.62%	2.76%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IXC iShares Global Energy ETF	3.08%	3.68%	4.56%	3.45%	4.76%	3.98%	4.86%	7.00%	3.51%	3.05%	2.86%	3.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IXC and EMEQ in my portfolio?

IXC and EMEQ have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IXC or EMEQ?

EMEQ has higher volatility (18.22%) compared to IXC (6.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IXC dropped -67.88% vs EMEQ's -19.99%.

Which ETF is better, IXC or EMEQ?

On 1-year performance, EMEQ leads with 127.62% vs 29.02% for IXC. On fees, IXC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, IXC has been the lower-risk option at 6.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IXC or EMEQ?

Over the 1-year period, EMEQ has performed better with a 127.62% return vs 29.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IXC or EMEQ?

IXC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IXC or EMEQ?

IXC has the higher dividend yield at 3.08%, compared with 1.62% for EMEQ.

What is the main difference between IXC and EMEQ?

IXC is categorized as Energy Equities, while EMEQ is Emerging Markets Diversified. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Nomura. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IXC and 0.86% for EMEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.27 vs 1.56), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.