PRAM.L vs. IEMA.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) and IEMA.L (iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - PRAM.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD while IEMA.L tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PRAM.L returned 23.23%/yr vs 24.09%/yr for IEMA.L. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PRAM.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for IEMA.L.

Performance

PRAM.L vs. IEMA.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 iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IEMA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PRAM.L achieves a 24.27% return, which is significantly lower than IEMA.L's 25.60% return.

PRAM.L

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

IEMA.L

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: 5.31%
• YTD: 25.60%
• 6M: 28.74%
• 1Y: 52.38%
• 3Y*: 24.09%
• 5Y*: 7.42%
• 10Y*: 10.07%

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

PRAM.L vs. IEMA.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%
IEMA.L iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	25.60%	34.41%	7.61%	9.43%	-20.23%	1.80%

Correlation

The correlation between PRAM.L and IEMA.L is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.72

Over the past year, PRAM.L and IEMA.L have become more correlated (0.98) than their long-term average of 0.72, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

Sectors	PRAM.L	IEMA.L
Technology	40.7%	36.8%
Financial Services	17.6%	19.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	9.6%
Industrials	8.3%	7.5%
Communication Services	6.1%	6.9%
Basic Materials	5.8%	6.5%
Energy	3.6%	4.1%
Healthcare	2.8%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	3.0%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.1%

Return for Risk

PRAM.L vs. IEMA.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

IEMA.L

IEMA.L Risk / Return Rank: 80
IEMA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
IEMA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
IEMA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 81
IEMA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
IEMA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. IEMA.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 iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IEMA.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	IEMA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.65	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	3.53	-0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.48	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.96	4.09	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.36	14.79	-0.43
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. IEMA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the IEMA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PRAM.L and IEMA.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	IEMA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	2.65	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.40	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.52	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.30	+0.45

Drawdowns

PRAM.L vs. IEMA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRAM.L drawdown since its inception was -28.74%, smaller than the maximum IEMA.L drawdown of -39.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRAM.L and IEMA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRAM.L	IEMA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.74%	-39.66%	+10.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.53%	-12.76%	+0.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.73%	-16.69%	-0.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.66%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.13%	-2.72%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.60%	-15.28%	+6.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.46%	3.53%	-0.07%

Volatility

PRAM.L vs. IEMA.L - Volatility Comparison

Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) and iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (IEMA.L) have volatilities of 8.38% and 8.63%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PRAM.L	IEMA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.38%	8.63%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.56%	17.01%	-0.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.30%	19.68%	-0.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.39%	18.73%	+2.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.39%	19.58%	+1.81%

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

PRAM.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than IEMA.L's 0.18% 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. IEMA.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

With a correlation of 0.98, PRAM.L and IEMA.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 IEMA.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 IEMA.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for IEMA.L.

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

PRAM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while IEMA.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: Amundi and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for PRAM.L and 0.18% for IEMA.L.