PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist) (LQEE.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

LQEE.L is traded in EUR, while EIMI.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EIMI.L values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LQEE.L achieves a -1.87% return, which is significantly lower than EIMI.L's 21.48% return.


LQEE.L

1D
0.01%
1M
-1.49%
6M
-1.87%
YTD
-1.87%
1Y
2.12%
3Y*
2.35%
5Y*
-2.88%
10Y*

EIMI.L

1D
-0.76%
1M
-5.10%
6M
15.06%
YTD
21.48%
1Y
36.14%
3Y*
18.44%
5Y*
7.83%
10Y*
8.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LQEE.L
iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist)
-1.87%5.71%-0.68%6.15%-20.01%-2.75%8.79%14.39%-6.81%1.25%
EIMI.L
iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF
21.48%16.48%14.45%7.70%-14.70%6.78%9.01%19.00%-10.15%3.94%

Correlation

The correlation between LQEE.L and EIMI.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

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

0.17

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

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2017

0.12

Over the past year, LQEE.L and EIMI.L have become more correlated (0.35) than their long-term average of 0.12, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LQEE.L
LQEE.L Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
LQEE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LQEE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
LQEE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
LQEE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
LQEE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

EIMI.L
EIMI.L Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist) (LQEE.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


LQEE.LEIMI.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.83

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.32

-0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.57

3.36

-2.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.39

10.37

-8.98

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LQEE.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LQEE.L and EIMI.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...

Drawdowns

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LQEE.L drawdown since its inception was -27.52%, smaller than the maximum EIMI.L drawdown of -34.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LQEE.L and EIMI.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LQEE.LEIMI.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.52%

-34.88%

+7.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.71%

-10.72%

+7.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.17%

-18.31%

+10.14%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.05%

-22.33%

-4.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-15.14%

-8.08%

-7.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.49%

-9.22%

-1.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.52%

3.48%

-1.96%

Volatility

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist) (LQEE.L) is 1.28%, while iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a volatility of 8.57%. This indicates that LQEE.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EIMI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LQEE.LEIMI.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.28%

8.57%

-7.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.29%

18.44%

-14.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.83%

20.69%

-14.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.47%

17.41%

-8.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.89%

18.63%

-9.74%

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LQEE.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EIMI.L's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

LQEE.L vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison

LQEE.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.03%, while EIMI.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
EIMI.L
iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LQEE.L
iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist)
5.03%4.75%5.02%4.58%3.79%2.69%2.69%3.45%3.76%0.65%

Frequently Asked Questions


LQEE.L and EIMI.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EIMI.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EIMI.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for LQEE.L.

LQEE.L is categorized as Global Bonds, while EIMI.L is Emerging Markets Equities. LQEE.L tracks iShares $ Corp Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Dist), while EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LQEE.L and 0.18% for EIMI.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LQEE.L and EIMI.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