LEML.L vs. EXCS.L
LEML.L (Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD) and EXCS.L (iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from Amundi and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LEML.L returned 20.41%/yr vs 24.90%/yr for EXCS.L. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LEML.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EXCS.L.
Performance
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
LEML.L is traded in GBp, while EXCS.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EXCS.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LEML.L achieves a 25.85% return, which is significantly lower than EXCS.L's 38.77% return.
LEML.L
- 1D
- -1.66%
- 1M
- 6.29%
- YTD
- 25.85%
- 6M
- 27.98%
- 1Y
- 53.27%
- 3Y*
- 20.41%
- 5Y*
- 8.13%
- 10Y*
- 10.54%
EXCS.L
- 1D
- -1.64%
- 1M
- 8.94%
- YTD
- 38.77%
- 6M
- 43.14%
- 1Y
- 73.63%
- 3Y*
- 24.90%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LEML.L Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD | 25.85% | 24.60% | 8.72% | 2.68% | -10.69% | 0.64% |
EXCS.L iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 38.77% | 26.13% | 5.55% | 10.95% | -8.31% | 2.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between LEML.L and EXCS.L 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2021 | 0.86 |
The correlation between LEML.L and EXCS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Financial Services
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Consumer Cyclical
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Industrials
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Communication Services
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Basic Materials
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Energy
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Consumer Defensive
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Healthcare
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Utilities
LEML.L
EXCS.L
Real Estate
LEML.L
EXCS.L
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. EXCS.L — Risk / Return Rank
LEML.L
EXCS.L
LEML.L vs. EXCS.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 iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.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.L | EXCS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.58 | 1.70 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.87 | 6.20 | -1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.96 | 22.70 | -5.75 |
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
| LEML.L | EXCS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.14 | 3.88 | -0.74 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 1.03 | -0.61 |
Drawdowns
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LEML.L drawdown since its inception was -31.91%, which is greater than EXCS.L's maximum drawdown of -17.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEML.L and EXCS.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LEML.L | EXCS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.91% | -17.51% | -14.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.89% | -11.81% | +0.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.34% | -17.51% | +2.17% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.14% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -27.59% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.51% | -2.34% | -0.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.48% | -4.85% | -5.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.13% | 3.23% | -0.10% |
Volatility
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD (LEML.L) is 7.42%, while iShares MSCI EM ex-China UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EXCS.L) has a volatility of 8.66%. This indicates that LEML.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EXCS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LEML.L | EXCS.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.42% | 8.66% | -1.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.42% | 16.55% | -2.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.89% | 18.88% | -1.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.15% | 15.36% | +0.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.94% | 15.36% | +2.58% |
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
LEML.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than EXCS.L's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
LEML.L vs. EXCS.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither LEML.L nor EXCS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, LEML.L and EXCS.L 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, EXCS.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EXCS.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for LEML.L.
Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for LEML.L and 0.18% for EXCS.L.
Find the right allocation for LEML.L and EXCS.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