LEML.L vs. PRAM.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LEML.L (Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD) and PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from Amundi tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LEML.L returned 20.41%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for PRAM.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LEML.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for PRAM.L.

Performance

LEML.L vs. PRAM.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 Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

LEML.L is traded in GBp, while PRAM.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the PRAM.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with LEML.L having a 25.85% return and PRAM.L slightly lower at 24.77%.

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%

PRAM.L

• 1D: -1.56%
• 1M: 5.71%
• YTD: 24.77%
• 6M: 26.35%
• 1Y: 51.29%
• 3Y*: 20.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LEML.L vs. PRAM.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%	0.19%
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	24.77%	23.16%	9.01%	3.99%	-8.64%	0.00%

Correlation

The correlation between LEML.L and PRAM.L is 0.95, 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.69

Over the past year, LEML.L and PRAM.L have become more correlated (0.95) than their long-term average of 0.69, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors	LEML.L	PRAM.L
Technology	36.9%	40.7%
Financial Services	19.5%	17.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	9.1%
Industrials	7.5%	8.3%
Communication Services	6.9%	6.1%
Basic Materials	6.6%	5.8%
Energy	4.1%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	2.8%
Healthcare	2.9%	2.8%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.1%

Return for Risk

LEML.L vs. PRAM.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: 88
LEML.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
LEML.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
LEML.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
LEML.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
LEML.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

PRAM.L

PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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. PRAM.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 Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.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	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	2.84	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.03	3.64	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.52	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.87	4.98	-0.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.96	16.58	+0.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current LEML.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is comparable to the PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEML.L and PRAM.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LEML.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	2.84	+0.31
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	0.82	-0.41

Drawdowns

LEML.L vs. PRAM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEML.L drawdown since its inception was -31.91%, which is greater than PRAM.L's maximum drawdown of -15.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEML.L and PRAM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEML.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.91%	-15.77%	-16.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.89%	-10.26%	-0.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.34%	-15.77%	+0.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.51%	-2.78%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.48%	-4.79%	-5.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.13%	3.08%	+0.05%

Volatility

LEML.L vs. PRAM.L - Volatility Comparison

Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF - Acc USD (LEML.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) have volatilities of 7.42% and 7.80%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LEML.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.42%	7.80%	-0.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.42%	15.43%	-1.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.89%	18.02%	-1.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.15%	18.89%	-2.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.94%	18.89%	-0.95%

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

LEML.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than PRAM.L's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEML.L vs. PRAM.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LEML.L and PRAM.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, LEML.L and PRAM.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.

Which ETF is better, LEML.L or PRAM.L?

On fees, PRAM.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEML.L or PRAM.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for LEML.L.

What is the main difference between LEML.L and PRAM.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for LEML.L and 0.10% for PRAM.L.