QEMM vs. XCEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QEMM (SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QEMM tracks the MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD) while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QEMM returned 8.96%/yr vs 12.99%/yr for XCEM. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QEMM charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.

Performance

QEMM vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QEMM achieves a 24.39% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 38.32% return. Over the past 10 years, QEMM has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 8.96%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.99% annualized return.

QEMM

• 1D: -1.21%
• 1M: 6.69%
• YTD: 24.39%
• 6M: 26.00%
• 1Y: 42.27%
• 3Y*: 19.52%
• 5Y*: 7.37%
• 10Y*: 8.96%

XCEM

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 12.13%
• YTD: 38.32%
• 6M: 44.13%
• 1Y: 71.14%
• 3Y*: 26.37%
• 5Y*: 11.95%
• 10Y*: 12.99%

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

QEMM vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QEMM SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF	24.39%	21.92%	4.98%	12.50%	-17.82%	6.34%	9.95%	15.40%	-13.33%	31.50%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	38.32%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%

Correlation

The correlation between QEMM and XCEM 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	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 3, 2015	0.79

The correlation between QEMM and XCEM shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (all time) to 0.90 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QEMM vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QEMM	XCEM
Technology	33.8%	1.1%
Financial Services	19.6%	7.7%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	1.1%
Industrials	7.2%	0.4%
Communication Services	6.4%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.1%	0.3%
Energy	5.7%	0.2%
Basic Materials	5.6%	0.7%
Healthcare	3.5%	0.1%
Utilities	3.0%	1.9%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.0%

Return for Risk

QEMM vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QEMM

QEMM Risk / Return Rank: 78
QEMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QEMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QEMM Omega Ratio Rank: 79
QEMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
QEMM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 90
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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.

	QEMM	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.54	3.42	-0.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	4.27	-0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.61	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.08	4.95	-0.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.92	19.98	-5.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QEMM vs. XCEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QEMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is comparable to the XCEM Sharpe Ratio of 3.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QEMM and XCEM, 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

	QEMM	XCEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.54	3.42	-0.88
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.68	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53	0.66	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.63	-0.29

Drawdowns

QEMM vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QEMM drawdown since its inception was -36.89%, smaller than the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QEMM and XCEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QEMM	XCEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.89%	-41.24%	+4.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.40%	-14.46%	+4.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.03%	-18.92%	+1.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.49%	-29.67%	+2.18%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.89%	-41.24%	+4.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.21%	-1.25%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.64%	-8.59%	-2.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.84%	3.57%	-0.73%

Volatility

QEMM vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) is 7.29%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that QEMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QEMM	XCEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.29%	9.43%	-2.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.78%	18.72%	-3.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.69%	20.89%	-4.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.23%	17.75%	-2.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	19.72%	-2.83%

QEMM vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QEMM vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison

QEMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, more than XCEM's 2.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QEMM SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF	4.34%	4.90%	5.17%	4.88%	4.07%	2.35%	2.48%	3.05%	2.86%	2.11%	2.03%	2.14%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	2.35%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QEMM and XCEM in my portfolio?

QEMM and XCEM 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 XCEM?

XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to QEMM (7.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QEMM dropped -36.89% vs XCEM's -41.24%.

Which ETF is better, QEMM or XCEM?

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 12.99% vs 8.96% for QEMM. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, QEMM has been the lower-risk option at 7.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QEMM or XCEM?

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 12.99% return vs 8.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QEMM or XCEM?

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

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

QEMM has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 2.35% for XCEM.

What is the main difference between QEMM and XCEM?

QEMM tracks MSCI EM Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QEMM and 0.16% for XCEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 2.54), 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.