PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SEMA.L vs. IEMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SEMA.L vs. IEMG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SEMA.L (iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc)) and IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SEMA.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while IEMG is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SEMA.L returned 10.90%/yr vs 11.04%/yr for IEMG. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SEMA.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for IEMG.

Performance

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc) (SEMA.L) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with SEMA.L having a 26.04% return and IEMG slightly lower at 25.48%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SEMA.L having a 10.90% annualized return and IEMG not far ahead at 11.04%.

SEMA.L

1D
-1.41%
1M
6.37%
YTD
26.04%
6M
28.18%
1Y
53.95%
3Y*
20.93%
5Y*
8.58%
10Y*
10.90%

IEMG

1D
-0.98%
1M
5.78%
YTD
25.48%
6M
26.55%
1Y
50.69%
3Y*
20.10%
5Y*
8.52%
10Y*
11.04%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SEMA.L
iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc)		26.04%25.09%9.38%3.47%-10.74%-1.60%14.69%12.62%-9.25%24.43%
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		25.48%23.12%8.36%5.95%-10.46%0.30%14.40%13.33%-9.88%25.50%

Correlation

The correlation between SEMA.L and IEMG is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.82

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

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2012

0.77

The correlation between SEMA.L and IEMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SEMA.L
IEMG

Technology

41.3%
35.0%

Financial Services

18.2%
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

9.0%
9.5%

Industrials

7.0%
9.0%

Communication Services

6.4%
6.4%

Basic Materials

6.0%
6.9%

Energy

3.6%
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
3.3%

Healthcare

2.7%
3.7%

Utilities

2.0%
2.2%

Real Estate

1.1%
1.7%

Technology

SEMA.L
41.3%
IEMG
35.0%

Financial Services

SEMA.L
18.2%
IEMG
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

SEMA.L
9.0%
IEMG
9.5%

Industrials

SEMA.L
7.0%
IEMG
9.0%

Communication Services

SEMA.L
6.4%
IEMG
6.4%

Basic Materials

SEMA.L
6.0%
IEMG
6.9%

Energy

SEMA.L
3.6%
IEMG
3.8%

Consumer Defensive

SEMA.L
2.8%
IEMG
3.3%

Healthcare

SEMA.L
2.7%
IEMG
3.7%

Utilities

SEMA.L
2.0%
IEMG
2.2%

Real Estate

SEMA.L
1.1%
IEMG
1.7%

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 UCITS ETF (Acc)

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF

Often compared with SEMA.L:
SEMA.L vs. EMIM.LSEMA.L vs. EIMI.LSEMA.L vs. VFEG.LSEMA.L vs. VWRA.LSEMA.L vs. SWRD.MISEMA.L vs. EQQQ.LSEMA.L vs. EDIV
Often compared with IEMG:
IEMG vs. VWOIEMG vs. EEMIEMG vs. IEFAIEMG vs. EMXCIEMG vs. SCHEIEMG vs. IXUSIEMG vs. SPY

Return for Risk

SEMA.L vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SEMA.L
SEMA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
SEMA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SEMA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
SEMA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
SEMA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
SEMA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
IEMG
IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc) (SEMA.L) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.

SEMA.LIEMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.16
2.94

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.05
3.80

+0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.56

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.90

4.74

+0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.45

16.96

+0.49

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SEMA.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.16, which is comparable to the IEMG Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SEMA.L and IEMG, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

SEMA.LIEMGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.16

2.94

+0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.53

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.59

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.44

-0.04

Drawdowns

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SEMA.L drawdown since its inception was -31.75%, roughly equal to the maximum IEMG drawdown of -31.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEMA.L and IEMG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SEMA.LIEMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.75%

-31.25%

-0.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.95%

-10.74%

-0.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.23%

-15.19%

-0.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.52%

-22.38%

-1.14%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.06%

-28.19%

+1.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.37%

-1.95%

-0.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.72%

-9.00%

-1.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.08%

3.00%

+0.08%

Volatility

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc) (SEMA.L) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) have volatilities of 7.29% and 7.42%, 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

SEMA.LIEMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

7.42%

-0.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.56%

14.98%

-0.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.00%

17.32%

-0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.21%

16.08%

+0.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.05%

18.91%

-0.86%

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SEMA.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than IEMG's 0.09% 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

SEMA.L vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison

SEMA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IEMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		2.20%2.75%3.20%2.89%2.71%3.06%1.87%3.15%2.76%2.35%2.28%2.53%
SEMA.L
iShares MSCI EM UCITS ETF (Acc)		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

SEMA.L and IEMG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for SEMA.L.

SEMA.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while IEMG is Emerging Markets Diversified. SEMA.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while IEMG tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.18% for SEMA.L and 0.09% for IEMG.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SEMA.L and IEMG

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