PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) and EMXC.L (Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from Amundi tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PRAM.L returned 23.23%/yr vs 32.03%/yr for EMXC.L. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PRAM.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for EMXC.L.

Performance

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) and Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

PRAM.L is traded in USD, while EMXC.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the EMXC.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRAM.L achieves a 24.27% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC.L's 36.35% return.

PRAM.L

• 1D: -1.56%
• 1M: 4.75%
• YTD: 24.27%
• 6M: 27.23%
• 1Y: 49.84%
• 3Y*: 23.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMXC.L

• 1D: -1.67%
• 1M: 6.79%
• YTD: 36.35%
• 6M: 43.13%
• 1Y: 74.42%
• 3Y*: 32.03%
• 5Y*: 11.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	24.27%	32.60%	7.14%	9.82%	-16.79%	0.00%
EMXC.L Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc	36.35%	53.41%	-3.24%	22.38%	-23.27%	2.51%

Correlation

The correlation between PRAM.L and EMXC.L is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.61

Over the past year, PRAM.L and EMXC.L have become more correlated (0.91) than their long-term average of 0.61, meaning their price movements have been converging.

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PRAM.L	EMXC.L
Technology	40.7%	45.0%
Financial Services	17.6%	19.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	4.5%
Industrials	8.3%	8.3%
Communication Services	6.1%	3.4%
Basic Materials	5.8%	6.9%
Energy	3.6%	4.2%
Healthcare	2.8%	2.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	2.9%
Utilities	2.1%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.1%	0.9%

Return for Risk

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRAM.L

PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

EMXC.L

EMXC.L Risk / Return Rank: 90
EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EMXC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EMXC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EMXC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) and Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.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.

	PRAM.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	3.06	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	3.78	-0.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.52	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.96	4.44	-0.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.36	16.94	-2.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the EMXC.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRAM.L and EMXC.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

	PRAM.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	3.06	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.59	+0.16

Drawdowns

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRAM.L drawdown since its inception was -28.74%, smaller than the maximum EMXC.L drawdown of -42.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRAM.L and EMXC.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRAM.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.74%	-42.58%	+13.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.53%	-16.67%	+4.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.73%	-21.97%	+5.24%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-42.18%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.13%	-2.99%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.60%	-13.12%	+4.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	4.38%	-0.92%

Volatility

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) is 8.38%, while Lyxor MSCI Emerging Markets Ex China UCITS ETF - Acc (EMXC.L) has a volatility of 10.32%. This indicates that PRAM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PRAM.L	EMXC.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.38%	10.32%	-1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.56%	21.19%	-4.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.30%	24.25%	-4.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.39%	21.70%	-0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.39%	23.65%	-2.26%

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRAM.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than EMXC.L's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PRAM.L vs. EMXC.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither PRAM.L nor EMXC.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PRAM.L and EMXC.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, PRAM.L and EMXC.L move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, PRAM.L or EMXC.L?

On fees, PRAM.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PRAM.L or EMXC.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for EMXC.L.

What is the main difference between PRAM.L and EMXC.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for PRAM.L and 0.15% for EMXC.L.