PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L

Last updated Jul 22, 2026
Documentation

SEDM.L (iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and HMEF.L (HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - SEDM.L tracks the MSCI EM IMI Screened Index while HMEF.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SEDM.L returned 6.98%/yr vs 7.00%/yr for HMEF.L. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SEDM.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for HMEF.L.

Performance

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (SEDM.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

SEDM.L is traded in USD, while HMEF.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the HMEF.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SEDM.L achieves a 18.51% return, which is significantly lower than HMEF.L's 20.00% return.

SEDM.L

1D
2.10%
1M
-7.21%
6M
13.19%
YTD
18.51%
1Y
31.62%
3Y*
20.07%
5Y*
6.98%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
9.88%

HMEF.L

1D
1.95%
1M
-6.77%
6M
14.13%
YTD
20.00%
1Y
35.09%
3Y*
20.46%
5Y*
7.00%
10Y*
45.01%
ALL TIME*
158.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
SEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		18.51%32.84%7.40%10.53%-20.48%-1.52%19.90%16.95%1.21%
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		20.00%33.96%7.26%7.85%-19.63%-3.16%18.32%17.27%1.62%

Correlation

The correlation between SEDM.L and HMEF.L is 0.96 - 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

0.96

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.95

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2018

0.95

The correlation between SEDM.L and HMEF.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SEDM.L
HMEF.L

Technology

45.0%
43.6%

Financial Services

17.8%
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.9%
8.0%

Industrials

7.2%
6.0%

Communication Services

5.8%
6.5%

Basic Materials

5.2%
5.5%

Healthcare

3.3%
2.7%

Energy

2.6%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.5%
1.0%

Utilities

1.1%
1.9%

Technology

SEDM.L
45.0%
HMEF.L
43.6%

Financial Services

SEDM.L
17.8%
HMEF.L
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

SEDM.L
7.9%
HMEF.L
8.0%

Industrials

SEDM.L
7.2%
HMEF.L
6.0%

Communication Services

SEDM.L
5.8%
HMEF.L
6.5%

Basic Materials

SEDM.L
5.2%
HMEF.L
5.5%

Healthcare

SEDM.L
3.3%
HMEF.L
2.7%

Energy

SEDM.L
2.6%
HMEF.L
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

SEDM.L
2.6%
HMEF.L
2.6%

Real Estate

SEDM.L
1.5%
HMEF.L
1.0%

Utilities

SEDM.L
1.1%
HMEF.L
1.9%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD

Often compared with SEDM.L:
SEDM.L vs. MIST.LSEDM.L vs. CSP1.LSEDM.L vs. IUIT.LSEDM.L vs. MINT.LSEDM.L vs. FLES.LSEDM.L vs. IGLN.LSEDM.L vs. ISAC.L
Often compared with HMEF.L:
HMEF.L vs. VFEG.LHMEF.L vs. IEEM.LHMEF.L vs. AIAI.LHMEF.L vs. EMIM.LHMEF.L vs. VWRL.LHMEF.L vs. EQQQ.LHMEF.L vs. HMWO.L

Return for Risk

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SEDM.L
SEDM.L Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
SEDM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SEDM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
SEDM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
SEDM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
SEDM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank
HMEF.L
HMEF.L Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMEF.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (SEDM.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.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.

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.

SEDM.LHMEF.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.43
1.63

-0.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.99
2.20

-0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.30

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.37

2.67

-0.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.30

8.39

-1.09

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SEDM.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the HMEF.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SEDM.L and HMEF.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.

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SEDM.L drawdown since its inception was -38.83%, roughly equal to the maximum HMEF.L drawdown of -39.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEDM.L and HMEF.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SEDM.LHMEF.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.83%

-39.89%

+1.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.30%

-13.08%

-0.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.22%

-16.21%

-1.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.83%

-34.73%

-0.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-39.89%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.57%

-8.03%

-0.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.84%

-11.04%

-1.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.32%

4.17%

+0.15%

Volatility

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (SEDM.L) and HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD (HMEF.L) have volatilities of 9.25% and 9.18%, 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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SEDM.LHMEF.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.25%

9.18%

+0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.84%

19.40%

+0.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.98%

21.51%

+0.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.02%

19.19%

-0.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.21%

141.99%

-121.78%

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

SEDM.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than HMEF.L's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SEDM.L vs. HMEF.L - Dividend Comparison

SEDM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, more than HMEF.L's 1.69% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMEF.L
HSBC MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF USD		1.69%1.98%2.43%2.58%2.99%2.01%1.66%2.11%2.14%37.43%168.62%225.12%
SEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM IMI Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		1.71%1.96%2.37%2.33%2.56%1.83%1.51%2.23%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.96, SEDM.L and HMEF.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.

On fees, HMEF.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMEF.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for SEDM.L.

SEDM.L tracks MSCI EM IMI Screened Index, while HMEF.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and HSBC. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for SEDM.L and 0.15% for HMEF.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SEDM.L and HMEF.L

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