QEMM vs. LDEM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QEMM (SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF) and LDEM (iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QEMM tracks the MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD) while LDEM tracks the MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QEMM returned 7.03%/yr vs 1.55%/yr for LDEM. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QEMM charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for LDEM.

Performance

QEMM vs. LDEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEMM achieves a 21.11% return, which is significantly higher than LDEM's 4.51% return.

QEMM

• 1D: -3.77%
• 1M: 1.15%
• YTD: 21.11%
• 6M: 21.59%
• 1Y: 35.60%
• 3Y*: 18.42%
• 5Y*: 7.03%
• 10Y*: 8.86%

LDEM

• 1D: -3.58%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: 4.51%
• 6M: 3.95%
• 1Y: 18.72%
• 3Y*: 14.15%
• 5Y*: 1.55%
• 10Y*: —

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

QEMM vs. LDEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QEMM SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF	21.11%	21.92%	4.98%	12.50%	-17.82%	6.34%	13.06%
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF	4.51%	32.49%	5.87%	6.49%	-22.46%	-2.03%	16.30%

Correlation

The correlation between QEMM and LDEM is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2020	0.88

The correlation between QEMM and LDEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

QEMM vs. LDEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QEMM	LDEM
Technology	25.2%	23.4%
Financial Services	13.1%	24.2%
Consumer Cyclical	4.8%	11.8%
Basic Materials	3.0%	6.9%
Communication Services	2.4%	10.0%
Energy	2.4%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	3.3%
Industrials	1.8%	7.1%
Utilities	1.5%	2.6%
Healthcare	0.9%	3.4%
Real Estate	0.6%	1.5%

Return for Risk

QEMM vs. LDEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QEMM

QEMM Risk / Return Rank: 66
QEMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
QEMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
QEMM Omega Ratio Rank: 67
QEMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
QEMM Martin Ratio Rank: 70

LDEM

LDEM Risk / Return Rank: 30
LDEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
LDEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
LDEM Omega Ratio Rank: 30
LDEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
LDEM Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

QEMM vs. LDEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM). 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.

	QEMM	LDEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	1.01	+0.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	1.47	+1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.20	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.44	1.42	+2.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.14	4.47	+7.68

QEMM vs. LDEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is higher than the LDEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEMM and LDEM, 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

QEMM vs. LDEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEMM drawdown since its inception was -36.89%, smaller than the maximum LDEM drawdown of -40.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEMM and LDEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QEMM	LDEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.89%	-40.82%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.40%	-13.21%	+2.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.03%	-15.12%	-1.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.19%	-39.17%	+11.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.06%	-6.09%	+2.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.60%	-17.26%	+6.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.94%	4.20%	-1.26%

Volatility

QEMM vs. LDEM - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF (LDEM) have volatilities of 9.31% and 9.21%, 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

	QEMM	LDEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.31%	9.21%	+0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.80%	16.17%	+0.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.46%	18.58%	-0.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.64%	19.42%	-3.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.98%	20.91%	-3.93%

QEMM vs. LDEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QEMM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than LDEM's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

QEMM vs. LDEM - Dividend Comparison

QEMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.46%, more than LDEM's 2.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LDEM iShares ESG MSCI EM Leaders ETF	2.94%	3.26%	2.64%	3.20%	4.93%	1.82%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QEMM SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF	4.46%	4.90%	5.17%	4.88%	4.07%	2.35%	2.48%	3.05%	2.86%	2.11%	2.03%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QEMM and LDEM in my portfolio?

QEMM and LDEM have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QEMM or LDEM?

QEMM has higher volatility (9.31%) compared to LDEM (9.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEMM dropped -36.89% vs LDEM's -40.82%.

Which ETF is better, QEMM or LDEM?

On 5-year performance, QEMM leads with 7.03% vs 1.55% for LDEM. On fees, LDEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, LDEM has been the lower-risk option at 9.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QEMM or LDEM?

Over the 5-year period, QEMM has performed better with a 7.03% return vs 1.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QEMM or LDEM?

LDEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for QEMM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QEMM or LDEM?

QEMM has the higher dividend yield at 4.46%, compared with 2.94% for LDEM.

What is the main difference between QEMM and LDEM?

QEMM tracks MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while LDEM tracks MSCI EM Extended ESG Leaders 5% Issuer Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEMM and 0.16% for LDEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QEMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.01), 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.