PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
UC99.L vs. EEDM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.L) and iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

UC99.L is traded in GBp, while EEDM.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EEDM.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UC99.L achieves a 11.11% return, which is significantly lower than EEDM.L's 18.62% return.


UC99.L

1D
-0.71%
1M
0.39%
6M
10.65%
YTD
11.11%
1Y
24.12%
3Y*
18.65%
5Y*
13.07%
10Y*
15.95%

EEDM.L

1D
0.00%
1M
-7.27%
6M
13.23%
YTD
18.62%
1Y
33.73%
3Y*
18.46%
5Y*
6.71%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
UC99.L
UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
11.11%9.22%23.54%28.83%-14.41%29.84%17.71%7.39%
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
18.62%25.83%8.57%2.77%-12.38%-1.93%16.24%3.81%

Correlation

The correlation between UC99.L and EEDM.L is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.54

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

0.48

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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2019

0.53

The correlation between UC99.L and EEDM.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

UC99.L
UC99.L Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
UC99.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UC99.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
UC99.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
UC99.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
UC99.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

EEDM.L
EEDM.L Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEDM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.L) and iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.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.


UC99.LEEDM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.31

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

3.04

-0.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.29

8.60

+0.68

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UC99.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the EEDM.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UC99.L and EEDM.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

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UC99.L drawdown since its inception was -23.04%, smaller than the maximum EEDM.L drawdown of -27.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UC99.L and EEDM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


UC99.LEEDM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.04%

-27.49%

+4.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.29%

-11.08%

+1.79%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.04%

-15.81%

-7.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.04%

-22.89%

-0.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.82%

-10.27%

+8.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.01%

-11.96%

+7.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.59%

3.92%

-1.33%

Volatility

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis (UC99.L) is 3.68%, while iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EEDM.L) has a volatility of 8.97%. This indicates that UC99.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEDM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


UC99.LEEDM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.68%

8.97%

-5.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.29%

18.83%

-9.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.67%

20.75%

-8.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.12%

17.79%

-1.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.39%

19.28%

-2.89%

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

UC99.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EEDM.L's 0.18% 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

UC99.L vs. EEDM.L - Dividend Comparison

UC99.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, less than EEDM.L's 1.65% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
EEDM.L
iShares MSCI EM CTB Enhanced ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.65%1.89%2.37%2.37%2.59%1.97%1.54%0.05%0.00%0.00%0.00%
UC99.L
UBS ETF (IE) Factor MSCI USA Quality UCITS ETF (USD) A-dis
0.41%0.46%0.67%0.85%0.79%0.78%0.98%0.78%1.27%0.93%1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


UC99.L and EEDM.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EEDM.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EEDM.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for UC99.L.

UC99.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while EEDM.L is Emerging Markets Equities. UC99.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while EEDM.L tracks MSCI EM ESG Enhanced CTB Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for UC99.L and 0.18% for EEDM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for UC99.L and EEDM.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