PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

MXFP.L is traded in GBp, while FEMQ.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the FEMQ.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXFP.L achieves a 26.12% return, which is significantly lower than FEMQ.L's 34.78% return.


MXFP.L

1D
-1.62%
1M
6.48%
YTD
26.12%
6M
28.40%
1Y
54.01%
3Y*
20.66%
5Y*
8.33%
10Y*
10.75%

FEMQ.L

1D
-1.83%
1M
10.66%
YTD
34.78%
6M
35.19%
1Y
57.18%
3Y*
23.41%
5Y*
9.81%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MXFP.L
Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF
26.12%24.86%8.78%2.95%-10.46%-1.96%14.06%12.84%-9.61%0.70%
FEMQ.L
Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF
34.78%20.96%6.49%9.64%-15.02%7.70%9.31%13.76%-9.24%2.50%

Correlation

The correlation between MXFP.L and FEMQ.L is 0.86, 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

0.86

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

0.88

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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2017

0.93

The correlation between MXFP.L and FEMQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MXFP.L
FEMQ.L

Technology

36.9%
49.5%

Financial Services

19.5%
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
9.6%

Industrials

7.5%
7.1%

Communication Services

6.9%
2.3%

Basic Materials

6.6%
5.2%

Energy

4.1%
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
1.9%

Healthcare

2.9%
1.8%

Utilities

2.1%
1.7%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.2%

Technology

MXFP.L
36.9%
FEMQ.L
49.5%

Financial Services

MXFP.L
19.5%
FEMQ.L
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

MXFP.L
9.6%
FEMQ.L
9.6%

Industrials

MXFP.L
7.5%
FEMQ.L
7.1%

Communication Services

MXFP.L
6.9%
FEMQ.L
2.3%

Basic Materials

MXFP.L
6.6%
FEMQ.L
5.2%

Energy

MXFP.L
4.1%
FEMQ.L
3.2%

Consumer Defensive

MXFP.L
3.0%
FEMQ.L
1.9%

Healthcare

MXFP.L
2.9%
FEMQ.L
1.8%

Utilities

MXFP.L
2.1%
FEMQ.L
1.7%

Real Estate

MXFP.L
1.0%
FEMQ.L
1.2%

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

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

MXFP.L
MXFP.L Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
MXFP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MXFP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
MXFP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
MXFP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
MXFP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

FEMQ.L
FEMQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEMQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEMQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
FEMQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEMQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.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.


MXFP.LFEMQ.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.67

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.03

6.48

-1.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.75

21.32

-3.57

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MXFP.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.18, which is comparable to the FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXFP.L and FEMQ.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MXFP.LFEMQ.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.18

3.52

-0.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

0.65

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.49

+0.12

Drawdowns

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXFP.L drawdown since its inception was -27.23%, roughly equal to the maximum FEMQ.L drawdown of -28.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXFP.L and FEMQ.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MXFP.LFEMQ.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.23%

-28.13%

+0.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.68%

-8.78%

-1.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.38%

-14.75%

-0.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.92%

-25.31%

+1.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.51%

-4.07%

+1.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.99%

-8.03%

-0.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.03%

2.67%

+0.36%

Volatility

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (MXFP.L) is 7.48%, while Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) has a volatility of 9.03%. This indicates that MXFP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEMQ.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MXFP.LFEMQ.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.48%

9.03%

-1.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.41%

14.19%

+0.22%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.92%

16.18%

+0.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.21%

15.00%

+1.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.99%

17.50%

+0.49%

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

MXFP.L has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than FEMQ.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

MXFP.L vs. FEMQ.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither MXFP.L nor FEMQ.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


MXFP.L and FEMQ.L have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, MXFP.L is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

MXFP.L is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FEMQ.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXFP.L and 0.50% for FEMQ.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MXFP.L and FEMQ.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