PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

MC.PA (LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE) is a stock, while PAEEM.PA (Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc) is Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM ex-Egypt ESG Broad CTB Select Index. Over the past 5 years, MC.PA returned -4.16%/yr vs 8.26%/yr for PAEEM.PA. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE (MC.PA) and Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc (PAEEM.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MC.PA achieves a -22.10% return, which is significantly lower than PAEEM.PA's 28.74% return.

MC.PA

1D
0.28%
1M
5.37%
YTD
-22.10%
6M
-20.51%
1Y
13.94%
3Y*
-14.15%
5Y*
-4.16%
10Y*
16.22%

PAEEM.PA

1D
0.65%
1M
3.07%
YTD
28.74%
6M
29.92%
1Y
48.05%
3Y*
21.77%
5Y*
8.26%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
MC.PA
LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE		-22.10%3.93%-11.73%9.60%-4.76%43.83%24.66%20.05%
PAEEM.PA
Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc		28.74%22.47%13.04%3.26%-15.31%4.42%8.27%4.74%

Correlation

The correlation between MC.PA and PAEEM.PA is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.20

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

0.31

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

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2019

0.45

Over the past year, the correlation between MC.PA and PAEEM.PA has dropped to 0.20 - well below their long-term average of 0.45, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE

Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc

Often compared with MC.PA:
MC.PA vs. LVMUYMC.PA vs. RMS.PAMC.PA vs. KER.PAMC.PA vs. CDI.PAMC.PA vs. LRLCYMC.PA vs. CLHMC.PA vs. ELF
Often compared with PAEEM.PA:
PAEEM.PA vs. PSP5.PAPAEEM.PA vs. PUST.PAPAEEM.PA vs. EWLD.PAPAEEM.PA vs. S500.PAPAEEM.PA vs. PE500.PAPAEEM.PA vs. CSH.PAPAEEM.PA vs. SP5.PA

Return for Risk

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
MC.PA
MC.PA Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
MC.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MC.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
MC.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
MC.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
MC.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
PAEEM.PA
PAEEM.PA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
PAEEM.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PAEEM.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
PAEEM.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
PAEEM.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
PAEEM.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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.

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE (MC.PA) and Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc (PAEEM.PA). 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.

MC.PAPAEEM.PADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.44
2.47

-2.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.89
3.24

-2.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.44

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.45

4.43

-3.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.86

15.28

-14.42

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MC.PA Sharpe Ratio is 0.44, which is lower than the PAEEM.PA Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MC.PA and PAEEM.PA, 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

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MC.PA drawdown since its inception was -54.74%, which is greater than PAEEM.PA's maximum drawdown of -31.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MC.PA and PAEEM.PA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

MC.PAPAEEM.PADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-54.74%

-31.94%

-22.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-30.65%

-10.70%

-19.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-48.87%

-18.68%

-30.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.03%

-23.63%

-25.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.03%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-40.96%

-3.98%

-36.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.15%

-10.65%

-1.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

16.12%

3.12%

+13.00%

Volatility

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE (MC.PA) is 8.40%, while Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc (PAEEM.PA) has a volatility of 8.90%. This indicates that MC.PA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PAEEM.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

MC.PAPAEEM.PADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.40%

8.90%

-0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.95%

16.84%

+5.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.45%

19.18%

+12.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.98%

17.33%

+12.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

27.84%

19.39%

+8.45%

Dividends

MC.PA vs. PAEEM.PA - Dividend Comparison

MC.PA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, while PAEEM.PA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MC.PA
LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE		2.63%2.02%2.05%1.70%1.76%0.96%0.90%1.50%2.09%1.71%1.98%2.28%
PAEEM.PA
Amundi PEA Emergent (MSCI Emerging) ESG Transition UCITS ETF Acc		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

MC.PA and PAEEM.PA have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MC.PA and PAEEM.PA

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