LDEM vs. XCEM
LDEM (iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - LDEM tracks the MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LDEM returned 1.89%/yr vs 11.95%/yr for XCEM. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.16% expense ratio.
Performance
LDEM vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LDEM achieves a 6.92% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 38.32% return.
LDEM
- 1D
- -1.61%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 6.92%
- 6M
- 7.76%
- 1Y
- 25.33%
- 3Y*
- 15.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.89%
- 10Y*
- —
XCEM
- 1D
- -1.25%
- 1M
- 12.13%
- YTD
- 38.32%
- 6M
- 44.13%
- 1Y
- 71.14%
- 3Y*
- 26.37%
- 5Y*
- 11.95%
- 10Y*
- 12.99%
LDEM vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF | 6.92% | 32.49% | 5.87% | 6.49% | -22.46% | -2.03% | 15.59% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 38.32% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 7.87% | 12.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between LDEM and XCEM is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2020 | 0.80 |
The correlation between LDEM and XCEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
LDEM vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LDEM
XCEM
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Communication Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Financial Services
LDEM
XCEM
Consumer Cyclical
LDEM
XCEM
Technology
LDEM
XCEM
Communication Services
LDEM
XCEM
Industrials
LDEM
XCEM
Basic Materials
LDEM
XCEM
Energy
LDEM
XCEM
Healthcare
LDEM
XCEM
Consumer Defensive
LDEM
XCEM
Utilities
LDEM
XCEM
Real Estate
LDEM
XCEM
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. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank
LDEM
XCEM
LDEM vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) 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.
| LDEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.61 | -0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.93 | 4.95 | -3.02 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.33 | 19.98 | -13.65 |
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 | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.44 | 3.42 | -1.98 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 | 0.68 | -0.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.66 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.63 | -0.37 |
Drawdowns
LDEM vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LDEM drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, roughly equal to the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LDEM and XCEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LDEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.82% | -41.24% | +0.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.21% | -14.46% | +1.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.12% | -18.92% | +3.80% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.17% | -29.67% | -9.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.24% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.92% | -1.25% | -2.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.36% | -8.59% | -8.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | 3.57% | +0.44% |
Volatility
LDEM vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) is 6.08%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that LDEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LDEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.08% | 9.43% | -3.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.90% | 18.72% | -4.82% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.68% | 20.89% | -3.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.09% | 17.75% | +1.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.73% | 19.72% | +1.01% |
LDEM vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both LDEM and XCEM 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. XCEM - Dividend Comparison
LDEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%, more than XCEM's 2.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF | 3.04% | 3.26% | 2.64% | 3.20% | 4.93% | 1.82% | 1.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 2.35% | 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
LDEM and XCEM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to LDEM (6.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LDEM dropped -40.82% vs XCEM's -41.24%.
On 5-year performance, XCEM leads with 11.95% vs 1.89% for LDEM. Both ETFs have the same 0.16% expense ratio. On volatility, LDEM has been the lower-risk option at 6.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 11.95% return vs 1.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LDEM and XCEM have the same expense ratio: 0.16% per year.
LDEM has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 2.35% for XCEM.
LDEM tracks MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Ameriprise Financial.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 1.44), 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 XCEM
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