PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
UB32.L vs. EMV.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

UB32.L vs. EMV.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UB32.L (UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis) and EMV.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from UBS and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, UB32.L returned 11.02%/yr vs 7.24%/yr for EMV.L. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UB32.L charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for EMV.L.

Performance

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB32.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UB32.L achieves a 26.16% return, which is significantly higher than EMV.L's 17.59% return. Over the past 10 years, UB32.L has outperformed EMV.L with an annualized return of 11.02%, while EMV.L has yielded a comparatively lower 7.24% annualized return.

UB32.L

1D
-1.51%
1M
6.18%
YTD
26.16%
6M
28.70%
1Y
54.13%
3Y*
21.10%
5Y*
8.64%
10Y*
11.02%

EMV.L

1D
-1.01%
1M
5.53%
YTD
17.59%
6M
17.45%
1Y
26.13%
3Y*
11.29%
5Y*
6.63%
10Y*
7.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
UB32.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		26.16%26.36%8.34%3.61%-10.46%-1.87%13.90%13.43%-9.29%24.98%
EMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		17.59%5.04%10.84%1.45%-4.20%5.93%4.08%3.48%-0.20%15.47%

Correlation

The correlation between UB32.L and EMV.L is 0.83, 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

0.83

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

0.76

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

0.79

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2012

0.77

The correlation between UB32.L and EMV.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (3 years) to 0.87 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
UB32.L
EMV.L

Technology

37.1%
32.4%

Financial Services

19.6%
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
6.7%

Industrials

7.3%
6.2%

Communication Services

7.0%
11.0%

Basic Materials

6.5%
2.9%

Energy

4.1%
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
6.9%

Healthcare

2.9%
6.1%

Utilities

2.1%
4.7%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.6%

Technology

UB32.L
37.1%
EMV.L
32.4%

Financial Services

UB32.L
19.6%
EMV.L
18.9%

Consumer Cyclical

UB32.L
9.5%
EMV.L
6.7%

Industrials

UB32.L
7.3%
EMV.L
6.2%

Communication Services

UB32.L
7.0%
EMV.L
11.0%

Basic Materials

UB32.L
6.5%
EMV.L
2.9%

Energy

UB32.L
4.1%
EMV.L
3.6%

Consumer Defensive

UB32.L
3.0%
EMV.L
6.9%

Healthcare

UB32.L
2.9%
EMV.L
6.1%

Utilities

UB32.L
2.1%
EMV.L
4.7%

Real Estate

UB32.L
1.1%
EMV.L
0.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis

iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF

Often compared with UB32.L:
UB32.L vs. AVEMUB32.L vs. UC99.LUB32.L vs. EUFM.LUB32.L vs. UC63.LUB32.L vs. PRAM.LUB32.L vs. UC44.LUB32.L vs. 5ESG.L
Often compared with EMV.L:
EMV.L vs. CEA1.LEMV.L vs. EMIM.LEMV.L vs. NDIA.LEMV.L vs. XDEQ.LEMV.L vs. FEMQ.LEMV.L vs. ZEM.TOEMV.L vs. MXFP.L

Return for Risk

UB32.L vs. EMV.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
UB32.L
UB32.L Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
UB32.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UB32.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
UB32.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
UB32.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
UB32.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank
EMV.L
EMV.L Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
EMV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
EMV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB32.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.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.

UB32.LEMV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.25
2.29

+0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.15
3.17

+0.98

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.43

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.17

3.28

+1.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.40

11.15

+7.25

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

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UB32.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.25, which is higher than the EMV.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UB32.L and EMV.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

UB32.LEMV.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.25

2.29

+0.96

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.55

0.61

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.54

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.41

+0.09

Drawdowns

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UB32.L drawdown since its inception was -30.25%, which is greater than EMV.L's maximum drawdown of -28.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UB32.L and EMV.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

UB32.LEMV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.25%

-28.68%

-1.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.68%

-7.93%

-2.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.80%

-11.19%

-3.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.87%

-11.19%

-12.68%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.71%

-22.59%

-5.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.44%

-1.54%

-0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.93%

-5.90%

-4.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.98%

2.34%

+0.64%

Volatility

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UB32.L) has a higher volatility of 7.38% compared to iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF (EMV.L) at 4.60%. This indicates that UB32.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

UB32.LEMV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.38%

4.60%

+2.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.38%

9.74%

+4.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.01%

11.37%

+5.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.51%

10.94%

+5.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.53%

13.28%

+5.25%

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UB32.L has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than EMV.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

UB32.L vs. EMV.L - Dividend Comparison

UB32.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, while EMV.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMV.L
iShares Edge MSCI EM Minimum Volatility UCITS ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
UB32.L
UBS ETF (LU) MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis		1.70%2.25%2.16%2.64%2.74%1.71%1.75%2.29%1.98%1.65%2.36%2.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

UB32.L and EMV.L have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, UB32.L is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

UB32.L is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EMV.L.

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for UB32.L and 0.40% for EMV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UB32.L and EMV.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