LDEM vs. EMXF
LDEM (iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF) and EMXF (iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - LDEM tracks the MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index while EMXF tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Choice ESG Screened 5% Issuer Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LDEM returned 2.41%/yr vs 7.69%/yr for EMXF. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.16% expense ratio.
Performance
LDEM vs. EMXF - Performance Comparison
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*
- —
LDEM vs. EMXF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Communication Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Financial Services
LDEM
EMXF
Consumer Cyclical
LDEM
EMXF
Technology
LDEM
EMXF
Communication Services
LDEM
EMXF
Industrials
LDEM
EMXF
Basic Materials
LDEM
EMXF
Energy
LDEM
EMXF
Healthcare
LDEM
EMXF
Consumer Defensive
LDEM
EMXF
Utilities
LDEM
EMXF
Real Estate
LDEM
EMXF
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
LDEM
EMXF
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.
| LDEM | EMXF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.58 | 2.69 | -1.11 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.20 | 3.58 | -1.38 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.49 | -0.20 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.18 | 3.99 | -1.81 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.19 | 15.38 | -8.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LDEM | EMXF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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
| LDEM | EMXF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.35% | 0.00% | -2.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.37% | -12.03% | -5.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| LDEM | EMXF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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