KEMQ vs. XCEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KEMQ (KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - KEMQ tracks the Solactive Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, KEMQ returned -2.87%/yr vs 11.73%/yr for XCEM. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KEMQ charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.

Performance

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KEMQ achieves a 6.99% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 36.99% return.

KEMQ

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: 7.12%
• YTD: 6.99%
• 6M: 8.35%
• 1Y: 36.95%
• 3Y*: 24.42%
• 5Y*: -2.87%
• 10Y*: —

XCEM

• 1D: -0.96%
• 1M: 8.28%
• YTD: 36.99%
• 6M: 42.75%
• 1Y: 67.98%
• 3Y*: 26.14%
• 5Y*: 11.73%
• 10Y*: 12.52%

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

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
KEMQ KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF	6.99%	56.28%	13.81%	0.77%	-38.09%	-27.31%	39.26%	28.26%	-25.52%	1.88%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	36.99%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	7.49%

Correlation

The correlation between KEMQ and XCEM is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2017	0.70

The correlation between KEMQ and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KEMQ	XCEM
Technology	45.0%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	33.0%	1.1%
Communication Services	15.5%	4.2%
Healthcare	3.5%	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	0.4%	0.3%
Basic Materials	-	0.7%
Energy	-	0.2%
Financial Services	-	7.7%
Industrials	-	0.4%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	1.9%

Return for Risk

KEMQ vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

KEMQ

KEMQ Risk / Return Rank: 36
KEMQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
KEMQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
KEMQ Omega Ratio Rank: 38
KEMQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
KEMQ Martin Ratio Rank: 31

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 89
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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.

	KEMQ	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	3.27	-1.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	4.12	-2.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.58	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	4.73	-3.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.52	19.08	-14.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KEMQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KEMQ and XCEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	KEMQ	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.42	3.27	-1.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.09	0.66	-0.75
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.64	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.06	0.63	-0.56

Drawdowns

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KEMQ drawdown since its inception was -70.72%, which is greater than XCEM's maximum drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KEMQ and XCEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	KEMQ	XCEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.72%	-41.24%	-29.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.94%	-14.46%	-7.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.94%	-18.92%	-3.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-66.02%	-29.67%	-36.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.14%	-2.20%	-25.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.69%	-8.59%	-27.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.20%	3.57%	+4.63%

Volatility

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF (KEMQ) has a higher volatility of 10.09% compared to Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) at 9.31%. This indicates that KEMQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KEMQ	XCEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.09%	9.31%	+0.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.87%	18.76%	+2.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.14%	20.92%	+5.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.88%	17.75%	+14.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.58%	19.72%	+9.86%

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

KEMQ has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

KEMQ vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

KEMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.92%, more than XCEM's 2.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KEMQ KraneShares Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index ETF	4.92%	5.27%	0.73%	0.29%	0.00%	0.28%	2.28%	1.76%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	2.37%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KEMQ and XCEM in my portfolio?

KEMQ and XCEM have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KEMQ or XCEM?

KEMQ has higher volatility (10.09%) compared to XCEM (9.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KEMQ dropped -70.72% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

Which ETF is better, KEMQ or XCEM?

On 5-year performance, XCEM leads with 11.73% vs -2.87% for KEMQ. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, XCEM has been the lower-risk option at 9.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KEMQ or XCEM?

Over the 5-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 11.73% return vs -2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KEMQ or XCEM?

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for KEMQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KEMQ or XCEM?

KEMQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.92%, compared with 2.37% for XCEM.

What is the main difference between KEMQ and XCEM?

KEMQ tracks Solactive Emerging Markets Consumer Technology Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: CICC and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for KEMQ and 0.16% for XCEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.27 vs 1.42), 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.