PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCEMX vs. LCILX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Martin Currie Emerging Markets Fund (MCEMX) and ClearBridge Sustainability Leaders Fund (LCILX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCEMX achieves a 31.93% return, which is significantly higher than LCILX's 10.76% return. Over the past 10 years, MCEMX has underperformed LCILX with an annualized return of 11.18%, while LCILX has yielded a comparatively higher 14.31% annualized return.


MCEMX

1D
1.30%
1M
12.38%
YTD
31.93%
6M
36.03%
1Y
66.16%
3Y*
22.80%
5Y*
5.53%
10Y*
11.18%

LCILX

1D
0.33%
1M
4.87%
YTD
10.76%
6M
9.87%
1Y
21.35%
3Y*
15.05%
5Y*
8.27%
10Y*
14.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MCEMX
Martin Currie Emerging Markets Fund
31.93%36.77%2.89%6.28%-26.82%-5.00%27.81%29.29%-18.82%47.10%
LCILX
ClearBridge Sustainability Leaders Fund
10.76%10.49%14.36%16.68%-20.85%24.76%35.82%37.85%-2.40%21.54%

Correlation

The correlation between MCEMX and LCILX is 0.62, 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

0.62

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

0.63

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

0.65

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 5, 2016

0.66

The correlation between MCEMX and LCILX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

MCEMX vs. LCILX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCEMX
MCEMX Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
MCEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
MCEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

LCILX
LCILX Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
LCILX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCILX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCILX Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
LCILX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCILX Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
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.

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Martin Currie Emerging Markets Fund (MCEMX) and ClearBridge Sustainability Leaders Fund (LCILX). 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.


MCEMXLCILXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.34

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.63

2.52

+2.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.76

11.07

+7.69

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCEMX Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is higher than the LCILX Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCEMX and LCILX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MCEMXLCILXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.19

1.85

+1.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.48

-0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.56

0.79

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.57

0.77

-0.20

Drawdowns

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCEMX drawdown since its inception was -46.45%, which is greater than LCILX's maximum drawdown of -31.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCEMX and LCILX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCEMXLCILXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-46.45%

-31.70%

-14.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.34%

-8.74%

-5.60%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.19%

-19.63%

+1.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-43.05%

-27.19%

-15.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-46.45%

-31.70%

-14.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.12%

-5.28%

-11.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.53%

1.99%

+1.54%

Volatility

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Volatility Comparison

Martin Currie Emerging Markets Fund (MCEMX) has a higher volatility of 9.42% compared to ClearBridge Sustainability Leaders Fund (LCILX) at 3.49%. This indicates that MCEMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCILX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCEMXLCILXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.42%

3.49%

+5.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.02%

9.14%

+8.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.78%

11.93%

+8.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.77%

17.31%

+2.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.12%

18.15%

+1.97%

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCEMX has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than LCILX's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCEMX vs. LCILX - Dividend Comparison

MCEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than LCILX's 4.40% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
LCILX
ClearBridge Sustainability Leaders Fund
4.40%4.87%6.02%0.75%0.42%1.42%4.18%0.61%0.56%0.73%0.80%
MCEMX
Martin Currie Emerging Markets Fund
0.51%0.68%0.62%1.41%0.70%0.23%0.54%2.54%1.03%0.17%2.04%

Frequently Asked Questions


MCEMX and LCILX have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MCEMX has higher volatility (9.42%) compared to LCILX (3.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCEMX dropped -46.45% vs LCILX's -31.70%.

MCEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 1.85), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MCEMX and LCILX

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