RWEM vs. XCEM
RWEM (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - RWEM tracks the FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RWEM returned 25.41%/yr vs 26.37%/yr for XCEM. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RWEM charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.
Performance
RWEM vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RWEM achieves a 26.61% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 38.32% return.
RWEM
- 1D
- 1.08%
- 1M
- 12.70%
- YTD
- 26.61%
- 6M
- 37.26%
- 1Y
- 56.82%
- 3Y*
- 25.41%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
RWEM vs. XCEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 26.61% | 28.17% | 7.24% | 21.56% | -20.11% | 0.42% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 38.32% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 2.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between RWEM and XCEM is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2021 | 0.73 |
Over the past year, the correlation between RWEM and XCEM has dropped to 0.44 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
RWEM vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RWEM
XCEM
Technology
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Healthcare
Technology
RWEM
XCEM
Financial Services
RWEM
XCEM
Basic Materials
RWEM
XCEM
Industrials
RWEM
XCEM
Consumer Cyclical
RWEM
XCEM
Communication Services
RWEM
XCEM
Consumer Defensive
RWEM
XCEM
Energy
RWEM
XCEM
Utilities
RWEM
XCEM
Real Estate
RWEM
XCEM
Healthcare
RWEM
XCEM
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
RWEM vs. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank
RWEM
XCEM
RWEM vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) 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.
| RWEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.61 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.71 | 4.95 | -1.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.99 | 19.98 | -7.99 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RWEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.79 | 3.42 | -1.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.68 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.66 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.59 | 0.63 | -0.04 |
Drawdowns
RWEM vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RWEM drawdown since its inception was -26.92%, smaller than the maximum XCEM drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWEM and XCEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RWEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.92% | -41.24% | +14.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.39% | -14.46% | -0.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.56% | -18.92% | -3.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.67% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -41.24% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.25% | +1.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.64% | -8.59% | -1.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.75% | 3.57% | +1.18% |
Volatility
RWEM vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) is 8.57%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that RWEM 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RWEM | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.57% | 9.43% | -0.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.47% | 18.72% | +10.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.82% | 20.89% | +10.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.36% | 17.75% | +3.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.36% | 19.72% | +1.64% |
RWEM vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
RWEM has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.
Dividends
RWEM vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison
RWEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, less than XCEM's 2.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RWEM Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.70% | 2.15% | 3.59% | 1.60% | 5.59% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
RWEM and XCEM have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to RWEM (8.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWEM dropped -26.92% vs XCEM's -41.24%.
On 3-year performance, XCEM leads with 26.37% vs 25.41% for RWEM. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, RWEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 26.37% return vs 25.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RWEM.
XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 1.70% for RWEM.
RWEM tracks FT Wilshire Emerging Large NxtGen Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RWEM and 0.16% for XCEM.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 1.79), 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.
Find the right allocation for RWEM and XCEM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer