MXFS.L vs. FEMQ.L

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

MXFS.L (Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc) and FEMQ.L (Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - MXFS.L tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Total Return (Net) Index while FEMQ.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MXFS.L returned 7.12%/yr vs 8.92%/yr for FEMQ.L. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MXFS.L charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEMQ.L.

Performance

MXFS.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 Acc (MXFS.L) and Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MXFS.L achieves a 24.54% return, which is significantly lower than FEMQ.L's 34.39% return.

MXFS.L

• 1D: 3.84%
• 1M: 1.41%
• YTD: 24.54%
• 6M: 27.98%
• 1Y: 46.47%
• 3Y*: 22.07%
• 5Y*: 7.12%
• 10Y*: 10.29%

FEMQ.L

• 1D: 1.67%
• 1M: 7.32%
• YTD: 34.39%
• 6M: 36.73%
• 1Y: 51.19%
• 3Y*: 25.36%
• 5Y*: 8.92%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MXFS.L Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc	24.54%	33.97%	7.22%	8.74%	-20.02%	-3.16%	18.07%	16.46%	-13.38%	2.85%
FEMQ.L Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF	34.39%	30.09%	4.70%	15.54%	-24.10%	6.73%	12.66%	18.31%	-14.16%	-20.05%

Correlation

The correlation between MXFS.L and FEMQ.L is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 30, 2017	0.86

The correlation between MXFS.L and FEMQ.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors	MXFS.L	FEMQ.L
Technology	35.4%	49.5%
Financial Services	20.3%	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	9.6%
Basic Materials	7.2%	5.2%
Communication Services	6.9%	2.3%
Industrials	6.8%	7.1%
Energy	3.8%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.1%	1.9%
Healthcare	3.0%	1.8%
Utilities	2.3%	1.7%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.2%

Return for Risk

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

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

MXFS.L

MXFS.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
MXFS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
MXFS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
MXFS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
MXFS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
MXFS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

FEMQ.L

FEMQ.L Risk / Return Rank: 93
FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Omega Ratio Rank: 94
FEMQ.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
FEMQ.L Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

MXFS.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 Acc (MXFS.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.

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.

	MXFS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	2.77	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	3.84	-0.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.51	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.62	4.57	-0.95
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.70	15.91	-3.21

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

The current MXFS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the FEMQ.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MXFS.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.

Drawdowns

MXFS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MXFS.L drawdown since its inception was -39.81%, smaller than the maximum FEMQ.L drawdown of -47.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MXFS.L and FEMQ.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	MXFS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.81%	-47.47%	+7.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.76%	-11.14%	-1.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.92%	-16.52%	-0.40%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.03%	-38.37%	+1.34%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.85%	-4.26%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.45%	-18.08%	+2.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.65%	3.21%	+0.44%

Volatility

MXFS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF Acc (MXFS.L) is 8.67%, while Fidelity Emerging Markets Quality Income UCITS ETF (FEMQ.L) has a volatility of 9.55%. This indicates that MXFS.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.

Volatility by Period

	MXFS.L	FEMQ.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.67%	9.55%	-0.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.02%	16.23%	+1.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.54%	18.38%	+2.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.93%	17.46%	+1.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.61%	20.89%	-1.28%

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

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

Dividends

MXFS.L vs. FEMQ.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MXFS.L and FEMQ.L in my portfolio?

MXFS.L and FEMQ.L have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, MXFS.L or FEMQ.L?

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

Which ETF is cheaper, MXFS.L or FEMQ.L?

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

What is the main difference between MXFS.L and FEMQ.L?

MXFS.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Total Return (Net) Index, while FEMQ.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for MXFS.L and 0.50% for FEMQ.L.