PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

WLDS.L (iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF) and EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - WLDS.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI World Small Cap Inde, while EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, WLDS.L returned 8.23%/yr vs 8.77%/yr for EIMI.L. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WLDS.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for EIMI.L.

Performance

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

WLDS.L is traded in GBP, while EIMI.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EIMI.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WLDS.L achieves a 14.58% return, which is significantly lower than EIMI.L's 24.75% return.

WLDS.L

1D
0.69%
1M
4.25%
YTD
14.58%
6M
14.95%
1Y
33.75%
3Y*
15.03%
5Y*
8.23%
10Y*
—

EIMI.L

1D
-1.30%
1M
5.47%
YTD
24.75%
6M
26.33%
1Y
50.86%
3Y*
20.20%
5Y*
8.77%
10Y*
11.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
WLDS.L
iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF		14.58%11.86%8.58%11.22%-8.89%16.71%12.54%20.41%-4.07%
EIMI.L
iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF		24.75%22.75%9.23%5.48%-10.12%0.29%15.31%11.94%-7.21%

Correlation

The correlation between WLDS.L and EIMI.L is 0.62, 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

0.62

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

0.59

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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2018

0.64

The correlation between WLDS.L and EIMI.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
WLDS.L
EIMI.L

Industrials

20.5%
8.9%

Technology

15.2%
35.0%

Financial Services

13.3%
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.6%
9.6%

Healthcare

9.5%
3.7%

Basic Materials

8.2%
6.9%

Real Estate

8.0%
1.7%

Energy

5.0%
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
3.3%

Communication Services

3.0%
6.4%

Utilities

2.8%
2.2%

Industrials

WLDS.L
20.5%
EIMI.L
8.9%

Technology

WLDS.L
15.2%
EIMI.L
35.0%

Financial Services

WLDS.L
13.3%
EIMI.L
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

WLDS.L
10.6%
EIMI.L
9.6%

Healthcare

WLDS.L
9.5%
EIMI.L
3.7%

Basic Materials

WLDS.L
8.2%
EIMI.L
6.9%

Real Estate

WLDS.L
8.0%
EIMI.L
1.7%

Energy

WLDS.L
5.0%
EIMI.L
3.9%

Consumer Defensive

WLDS.L
3.9%
EIMI.L
3.3%

Communication Services

WLDS.L
3.0%
EIMI.L
6.4%

Utilities

WLDS.L
2.8%
EIMI.L
2.2%

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 World Small Cap UCITS ETF

iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF

Often compared with WLDS.L:
WLDS.L vs. WOSC.LWLDS.L vs. AVSG.LWLDS.L vs. URTHWLDS.L vs. EQGB.LWLDS.L vs. EXUS.LWLDS.L vs. VUAA.LWLDS.L vs. XRSG.L
Often compared with EIMI.L:
EIMI.L vs. VFEA.DEEIMI.L vs. CSPX.LEIMI.L vs. AVEMEIMI.L vs. SWRD.LEIMI.L vs. VWOEIMI.L vs. VFEG.LEIMI.L vs. AEME.L

Return for Risk

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
WLDS.L
WLDS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WLDS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
WLDS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
WLDS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
WLDS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
EIMI.L
EIMI.L Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
EIMI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L) and iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.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.

WLDS.LEIMI.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.67
2.83

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.75
3.67

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.53

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.32

4.78

-0.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.35

16.25

+0.09

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

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WLDS.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the EIMI.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WLDS.L and EIMI.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

WLDS.LEIMI.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

2.83

-0.16

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

—

0.60

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.56

0.47

+0.09

Drawdowns

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WLDS.L drawdown since its inception was -33.26%, roughly equal to the maximum EIMI.L drawdown of -31.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WLDS.L and EIMI.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

WLDS.LEIMI.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.26%

-31.70%

-1.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.78%

-10.58%

+2.80%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.55%

-15.79%

-5.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.55%

-22.27%

+0.72%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-26.10%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.29%

+2.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.36%

-8.72%

+2.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.06%

3.12%

-1.06%

Volatility

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF (WLDS.L) is 3.41%, while iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a volatility of 7.58%. This indicates that WLDS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EIMI.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

WLDS.LEIMI.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.41%

7.58%

-4.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.29%

15.58%

-6.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.58%

17.91%

-5.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.53%

16.61%

-1.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.29%

18.39%

-1.10%

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

WLDS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than EIMI.L's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

WLDS.L vs. EIMI.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither WLDS.L nor EIMI.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

WLDS.L and EIMI.L have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EIMI.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for WLDS.L.

WLDS.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while EIMI.L is Emerging Markets Equities. WLDS.L tracks MSCI World Small Cap Inde, while EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for WLDS.L and 0.18% for EIMI.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WLDS.L and EIMI.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