PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LDEM vs. EMXF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LDEM vs. EMXF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) and iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF (EMXF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LDEM achieves a 8.67% return, which is significantly lower than EMXF's 26.41% return.


LDEM

1D
1.14%
1M
1.54%
YTD
8.67%
6M
9.67%
1Y
27.60%
3Y*
15.69%
5Y*
2.41%
10Y*

EMXF

1D
0.91%
1M
10.00%
YTD
26.41%
6M
29.29%
1Y
49.61%
3Y*
22.21%
5Y*
7.69%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LDEM vs. EMXF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
LDEM
iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF
8.67%32.49%5.87%6.49%-22.46%-2.03%13.46%
EMXF
iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF
26.41%29.40%8.03%6.63%-18.99%4.45%15.32%

Correlation

The correlation between LDEM and EMXF is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.91

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020

0.85

The correlation between LDEM and EMXF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

LDEM vs. EMXF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LDEM
EMXF

Financial Services

28.2%
32.2%

Consumer Cyclical

14.0%
5.7%

Technology

13.0%
35.2%

Communication Services

11.2%
8.0%

Industrials

8.0%
5.5%

Basic Materials

7.8%
2.6%

Energy

5.3%
0.0%

Healthcare

4.3%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
2.9%

Utilities

2.9%
0.6%

Real Estate

1.7%
1.7%

Financial Services

LDEM
28.2%
EMXF
32.2%

Consumer Cyclical

LDEM
14.0%
EMXF
5.7%

Technology

LDEM
13.0%
EMXF
35.2%

Communication Services

LDEM
11.2%
EMXF
8.0%

Industrials

LDEM
8.0%
EMXF
5.5%

Basic Materials

LDEM
7.8%
EMXF
2.6%

Energy

LDEM
5.3%
EMXF
0.0%

Healthcare

LDEM
4.3%
EMXF
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

LDEM
3.6%
EMXF
2.9%

Utilities

LDEM
2.9%
EMXF
0.6%

Real Estate

LDEM
1.7%
EMXF
1.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

LDEM vs. EMXF — Risk / Return Rank

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

LDEM
LDEM Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
LDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
LDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
LDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

EMXF
EMXF Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
EMXF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXF Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXF Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

LDEM vs. EMXF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) and iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF (EMXF). 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.


LDEMEMXFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.58

2.69

-1.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.20

3.58

-1.38

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.49

-0.20

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.18

3.99

-1.81

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.19

15.38

-8.19

LDEM vs. EMXF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LDEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is lower than the EMXF Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LDEM and EMXF, 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


LDEMEMXFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.58

2.69

-1.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.13

0.35

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.28

0.53

-0.25

Drawdowns

LDEM vs. EMXF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LDEM drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, which is greater than EMXF's maximum drawdown of -33.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDEM and EMXF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LDEMEMXFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.82%

-33.13%

-7.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.21%

-12.53%

-0.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.12%

-15.93%

+0.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.17%

-32.89%

-6.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.35%

0.00%

-2.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.37%

-12.03%

-5.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.00%

3.25%

+0.75%

Volatility

LDEM vs. EMXF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) is 5.90%, while iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF (EMXF) has a volatility of 7.92%. This indicates that LDEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LDEMEMXFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.90%

7.92%

-2.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.79%

16.06%

-2.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.61%

18.54%

-0.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.08%

22.15%

-3.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.73%

21.77%

-1.04%

LDEM vs. EMXF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both LDEM and EMXF have an expense ratio of 0.16%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

LDEM vs. EMXF - Dividend Comparison

LDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.00%, more than EMXF's 2.72% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
EMXF
iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF
2.72%3.43%2.92%2.25%2.42%1.87%0.41%
LDEM
iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF
3.00%3.26%2.64%3.20%4.93%1.82%1.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, LDEM and EMXF 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.

EMXF has higher volatility (7.92%) compared to LDEM (5.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LDEM dropped -40.82% vs EMXF's -33.13%.

On 5-year performance, EMXF leads with 7.69% vs 2.41% for LDEM. Both ETFs have the same 0.16% expense ratio. On volatility, LDEM has been the lower-risk option at 5.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXF has performed better with a 7.69% return vs 2.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LDEM and EMXF have the same expense ratio: 0.16% per year.

LDEM has the higher dividend yield at 3.00%, compared with 2.72% for EMXF.

LDEM tracks MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index, while EMXF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Choice ESG Screened 5% Issuer Capped Index.

EMXF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.58), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LDEM and EMXF

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