LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LUXG.L (Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD) and CEMG.L (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Consumer Staples Equities funds tracking the Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR, from Amundi and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LUXG.L returned 10.54%/yr vs 4.57%/yr for CEMG.L. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LUXG.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CEMG.L.

Performance

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with LUXG.L having a -7.30% return and CEMG.L slightly higher at -7.19%. Over the past 10 years, LUXG.L has outperformed CEMG.L with an annualized return of 10.54%, while CEMG.L has yielded a comparatively lower 4.57% annualized return.

LUXG.L

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 5.50%
• YTD: -7.30%
• 6M: -6.56%
• 1Y: 5.65%
• 3Y*: -0.76%
• 5Y*: 0.46%
• 10Y*: 10.54%

CEMG.L

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: -7.19%
• 6M: -8.71%
• 1Y: -5.56%
• 3Y*: 3.19%
• 5Y*: -2.02%
• 10Y*: 4.57%

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

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LUXG.L Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD	-7.30%	6.94%	-0.12%	9.77%	-14.46%	23.84%	31.63%	24.83%	-7.67%	26.63%
CEMG.L iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-7.19%	5.10%	12.22%	-0.12%	-12.63%	-8.79%	23.19%	15.37%	-15.11%	28.46%

Correlation

The correlation between LUXG.L and CEMG.L is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2016	0.69

The correlation between LUXG.L and CEMG.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LUXG.L	CEMG.L
Technology	55.0%	3.5%
Consumer Cyclical	13.4%	48.8%
Communication Services	13.3%	13.6%
Healthcare	6.2%	5.5%
Financial Services	4.4%	0.1%
Utilities	2.4%	-
Energy	2.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.9%	27.4%
Industrials	1.0%	1.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Real Estate	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

LUXG.L

LUXG.L Risk / Return Rank: 14
LUXG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
LUXG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
LUXG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 13
LUXG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
LUXG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 13

CEMG.L

CEMG.L Risk / Return Rank: 5
CEMG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CEMG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
CEMG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5
CEMG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
CEMG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.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.

	LUXG.L	CEMG.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	-0.40	+0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.58	-0.46	+1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	0.94	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.35	-0.36	+0.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.87	-0.74	+1.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LUXG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is higher than the CEMG.L Sharpe Ratio of -0.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LUXG.L and CEMG.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

	LUXG.L	CEMG.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30	-0.40	+0.69
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02	-0.11	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.24	+0.28
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.26	+0.24

Drawdowns

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LUXG.L drawdown since its inception was -36.58%, which is greater than CEMG.L's maximum drawdown of -33.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LUXG.L and CEMG.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	LUXG.L	CEMG.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.58%	-33.56%	-3.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.95%	-15.49%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.30%	-16.56%	-8.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.20%	-28.99%	-0.21%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.58%	-33.56%	-3.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.83%	-19.36%	+7.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.19%	-12.31%	+4.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.48%	7.51%	-1.03%

Volatility

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi ETF S&P Global Luxury UCITS ETF USD (LUXG.L) has a higher volatility of 6.60% compared to iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Consumer Growth UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CEMG.L) at 4.40%. This indicates that LUXG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEMG.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LUXG.L	CEMG.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.60%	4.40%	+2.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.18%	11.94%	+3.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.83%	14.02%	+4.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.57%	18.88%	+1.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.37%	18.87%	+1.50%

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

LUXG.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CEMG.L's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

LUXG.L vs. CEMG.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither LUXG.L nor CEMG.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LUXG.L and CEMG.L in my portfolio?

LUXG.L and CEMG.L have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, LUXG.L or CEMG.L?

On fees, LUXG.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LUXG.L or CEMG.L?

LUXG.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CEMG.L.

What is the main difference between LUXG.L and CEMG.L?

Both ETFs track Cat 50%MSCI Wld/CD NR&50%MSCI Wld/CS NR. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for LUXG.L and 0.60% for CEMG.L.