UL vs. IEMG
UL (Unilever PLC) is a stock, while IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) is Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). Over the past 10 years, UL returned 5.06%/yr vs 8.90%/yr for IEMG. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
UL vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UL achieves a -2.45% return, which is significantly lower than IEMG's 17.13% return. Over the past 10 years, UL has underperformed IEMG with an annualized return of 5.06%, while IEMG has yielded a comparatively higher 8.90% annualized return.
UL
- 1D
- 2.05%
- 1M
- 6.25%
- 6M
- -0.65%
- YTD
- -2.45%
- 1Y
- -4.46%
- 3Y*
- 5.58%
- 5Y*
- 2.00%
- 10Y*
- 5.06%
IEMG
- 1D
- -1.97%
- 1M
- -6.06%
- 6M
- 10.62%
- YTD
- 17.13%
- 1Y
- 31.69%
- 3Y*
- 18.63%
- 5Y*
- 6.68%
- 10Y*
- 8.90%
UL vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UL Unilever PLC | -2.45% | 5.96% | 20.90% | -0.17% | -2.82% | -7.61% | 9.04% | 12.88% | -2.34% | 40.15% |
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 17.13% | 32.56% | 6.50% | 11.52% | -19.98% | -0.64% | 17.87% | 17.81% | -14.92% | 37.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between UL and IEMG is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2012 | 0.35 |
The correlation between UL and IEMG shifts across timeframes, from -0.01 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
UL vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank
UL
IEMG
UL vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Unilever PLC (UL) 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.
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.
| UL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.27 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.18 | 2.41 | -2.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.34 | 8.05 | -8.39 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UL vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UL drawdown since its inception was -53.55%, which is greater than IEMG's maximum drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UL and IEMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.55% | -38.71% | -14.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.09% | -13.21% | -11.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.09% | -17.21% | -7.88% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | -33.68% | +8.02% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.13% | -38.71% | +8.58% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.47% | -9.17% | -5.30% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.62% | -12.90% | +2.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 13.13% | 3.95% | +9.18% |
Volatility
UL vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Unilever PLC (UL) is 6.86%, while iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a volatility of 9.60%. This indicates that UL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.86% | 9.60% | -2.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.37% | 21.04% | -3.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.18% | 22.96% | -0.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.04% | 19.18% | +1.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.52% | 20.23% | +1.29% |
Dividends
UL vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison
UL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.64%, more than IEMG's 2.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 2.30% | 2.75% | 3.20% | 2.89% | 2.71% | 3.06% | 1.87% | 3.15% | 2.76% | 2.35% | 2.28% | 2.53% |
UL Unilever PLC | 3.64% | 3.51% | 3.29% | 3.83% | 3.57% | 3.77% | 3.07% | 3.18% | 3.49% | 2.80% | 3.42% | 3.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UL and IEMG have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IEMG has higher volatility (9.60%) compared to UL (6.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UL dropped -53.55% vs IEMG's -38.71%.
IEMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.39 vs -0.20), 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 UL 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