LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE
LEAD.DE (Amundi MSCI Europe ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Acc) and AMED.DE (Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C)) are both Europe Equities funds from Amundi - LEAD.DE tracks the MSCI Europe ESG Leaders while AMED.DE tracks the MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LEAD.DE returned 8.61%/yr vs 10.41%/yr for AMED.DE. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LEAD.DE charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AMED.DE.
Performance
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LEAD.DE achieves a 9.44% return, which is significantly lower than AMED.DE's 16.87% return.
LEAD.DE
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- 4.78%
- YTD
- 9.44%
- 6M
- 11.63%
- 1Y
- 16.87%
- 3Y*
- 11.72%
- 5Y*
- 8.61%
- 10Y*
- —
AMED.DE
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 7.96%
- YTD
- 16.87%
- 6M
- 18.54%
- 1Y
- 26.45%
- 3Y*
- 16.11%
- 5Y*
- 10.41%
- 10Y*
- 9.75%
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LEAD.DE Amundi MSCI Europe ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Acc | 9.44% | 13.89% | 6.93% | 16.25% | -11.84% | 24.71% | 1.30% |
AMED.DE Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) | 16.87% | 20.15% | 5.95% | 16.68% | -10.71% | 20.90% | 0.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between LEAD.DE and AMED.DE is 0.92, 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 | 0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2020 | 0.93 |
The correlation between LEAD.DE and AMED.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE — Risk / Return Rank
LEAD.DE
AMED.DE
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi MSCI Europe ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Acc (LEAD.DE) and Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE). 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.
| LEAD.DE | AMED.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.33 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.61 | 2.49 | -0.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.00 | 9.40 | -3.41 |
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
| LEAD.DE | AMED.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.22 | 1.74 | -0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.58 | 0.65 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.57 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.72 | 0.47 | +0.25 |
Drawdowns
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LEAD.DE drawdown since its inception was -21.53%, smaller than the maximum AMED.DE drawdown of -38.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD.DE and AMED.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LEAD.DE | AMED.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.53% | -38.35% | +16.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.43% | -10.56% | +0.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.59% | -14.07% | -2.52% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.53% | -24.06% | +2.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -38.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.11% | -0.17% | -0.94% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.13% | -6.69% | +2.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.81% | 2.81% | 0.00% |
Volatility
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Amundi MSCI Europe ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Acc (LEAD.DE) is 4.67%, while Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that LEAD.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMED.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LEAD.DE | AMED.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.67% | 5.61% | -0.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.36% | 12.64% | -1.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.78% | 15.19% | -1.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.65% | 15.87% | -1.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.47% | 17.00% | -2.53% |
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
LEAD.DE has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than AMED.DE's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
LEAD.DE vs. AMED.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither LEAD.DE nor AMED.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, LEAD.DE and AMED.DE 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.
On fees, LEAD.DE is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LEAD.DE is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMED.DE.
LEAD.DE tracks MSCI Europe ESG Leaders, while AMED.DE tracks MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LEAD.DE and 0.25% for AMED.DE.
Find the right allocation for LEAD.DE and AMED.DE
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