PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LEML.L vs. ACWL.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD (LEML.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEML.L achieves a 27.97% return, which is significantly higher than ACWL.L's 12.44% return. Over the past 10 years, LEML.L has underperformed ACWL.L with an annualized return of 10.95%, while ACWL.L has yielded a comparatively higher 13.73% annualized return.


LEML.L

1D
-0.87%
1M
10.52%
YTD
27.97%
6M
30.42%
1Y
57.27%
3Y*
21.05%
5Y*
8.49%
10Y*
10.95%

ACWL.L

1D
-0.29%
1M
6.05%
YTD
12.44%
6M
12.71%
1Y
30.24%
3Y*
18.94%
5Y*
12.39%
10Y*
13.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LEML.L
Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD
27.97%24.60%8.72%2.68%-10.69%-1.92%13.57%13.03%-9.98%24.60%
ACWL.L
Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF
12.44%13.63%21.43%13.09%-8.59%20.41%9.74%18.01%2.02%11.14%

Correlation

The correlation between LEML.L and ACWL.L is 0.68, 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

0.68

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

0.47

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

0.34

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2015

0.21

Over the past year, LEML.L and ACWL.L have become more correlated (0.68) than their long-term average of 0.21, meaning their price movements have been converging.

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LEML.L
ACWL.L

Technology

36.9%
29.3%

Financial Services

19.5%
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
9.3%

Industrials

7.5%
10.9%

Communication Services

6.9%
9.0%

Basic Materials

6.6%
3.7%

Energy

4.1%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
5.0%

Healthcare

2.9%
8.1%

Utilities

2.1%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.8%

Technology

LEML.L
36.9%
ACWL.L
29.3%

Financial Services

LEML.L
19.5%
ACWL.L
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

LEML.L
9.6%
ACWL.L
9.3%

Industrials

LEML.L
7.5%
ACWL.L
10.9%

Communication Services

LEML.L
6.9%
ACWL.L
9.0%

Basic Materials

LEML.L
6.6%
ACWL.L
3.7%

Energy

LEML.L
4.1%
ACWL.L
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

LEML.L
3.0%
ACWL.L
5.0%

Healthcare

LEML.L
2.9%
ACWL.L
8.1%

Utilities

LEML.L
2.1%
ACWL.L
2.6%

Real Estate

LEML.L
1.0%
ACWL.L
1.8%

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

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEML.L
LEML.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
LEML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
LEML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

ACWL.L
ACWL.L Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD (LEML.L) and Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L). 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.


LEML.LACWL.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.63

1.59

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.23

4.26

+0.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.25

17.67

+0.58

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEML.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.39, which is comparable to the ACWL.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEML.L and ACWL.L, 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


LEML.LACWL.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.39

3.06

+0.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

1.90

-1.37

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

2.61

-1.99

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

2.36

-1.94

Drawdowns

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEML.L drawdown since its inception was -31.91%, which is greater than ACWL.L's maximum drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEML.L and ACWL.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LEML.LACWL.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.91%

-18.15%

-13.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.89%

-7.06%

-3.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.34%

-18.15%

+2.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.14%

-18.15%

-5.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.59%

-18.15%

-9.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.87%

-0.29%

-0.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.48%

-2.44%

-8.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

1.71%

+1.42%

Volatility

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD (LEML.L) has a higher volatility of 7.36% compared to Lyxor MSCI All Country World UCITS ETF (ACWL.L) at 2.64%. This indicates that LEML.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ACWL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LEML.LACWL.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.36%

2.64%

+4.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.29%

7.02%

+7.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.80%

9.88%

+6.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.14%

16.54%

-0.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.94%

23.34%

-5.40%

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEML.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than ACWL.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

LEML.L vs. ACWL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LEML.L nor ACWL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


LEML.L and ACWL.L have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ACWL.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ACWL.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for LEML.L.

LEML.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while ACWL.L is Global Equities. LEML.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while ACWL.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for LEML.L and 0.45% for ACWL.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LEML.L and ACWL.L

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