XC vs. EMM
XC (WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) and EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. XC is passively managed, while EMM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XC returned 9.87%/yr vs 22.67%/yr for EMM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XC charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMM.
Performance
XC vs. EMM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XC achieves a -3.47% return, which is significantly lower than EMM's 32.97% return.
XC
- 1D
- -1.53%
- 1M
- -1.76%
- YTD
- -3.47%
- 6M
- -2.10%
- 1Y
- 8.33%
- 3Y*
- 9.87%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMM
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- 10.12%
- YTD
- 32.97%
- 6M
- 38.50%
- 1Y
- 63.51%
- 3Y*
- 22.67%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XC vs. EMM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
XC WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | -3.47% | 18.19% | 5.49% | 15.10% |
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 32.97% | 30.21% | 2.34% | 3.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between XC and EMM is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023 | 0.85 |
The correlation between XC and EMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
XC vs. EMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XC
EMM
Financial Services
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Communication Services
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
XC
EMM
Basic Materials
XC
EMM
Consumer Cyclical
XC
EMM
Consumer Defensive
XC
EMM
Industrials
XC
EMM
Communication Services
XC
EMM
Energy
XC
EMM
Utilities
XC
EMM
Real Estate
XC
EMM
Technology
XC
EMM
Healthcare
XC
EMM
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
XC vs. EMM — Risk / Return Rank
XC
EMM
XC vs. EMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (XC) and Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM). 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.
| XC | EMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.52 | -0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.67 | 4.33 | -3.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.94 | 18.13 | -16.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XC | EMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 | 2.94 | -2.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.71 | 1.17 | -0.46 |
Drawdowns
XC vs. EMM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XC drawdown since its inception was -20.97%, roughly equal to the maximum EMM drawdown of -21.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XC and EMM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XC | EMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.97% | -21.99% | +1.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.47% | -14.75% | +2.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.97% | -21.99% | +1.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.35% | -1.15% | -8.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.12% | -4.68% | +0.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.29% | 3.51% | +0.78% |
Volatility
XC vs. EMM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (XC) is 5.00%, while Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a volatility of 9.79%. This indicates that XC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XC | EMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.00% | 9.79% | -4.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.60% | 19.28% | -6.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.78% | 21.69% | -6.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.87% | 18.83% | -2.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.87% | 18.83% | -2.96% |
XC vs. EMM - Expense Ratio Comparison
XC has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is lower than EMM's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
XC vs. EMM - Dividend Comparison
XC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.41%, more than EMM's 0.67% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 0.67% | 0.90% | 0.80% | 0.66% | 0.00% |
XC WisdomTree Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 12.41% | 11.74% | 1.49% | 1.42% | 0.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XC and EMM have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMM has higher volatility (9.79%) compared to XC (5.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XC dropped -20.97% vs EMM's -21.99%.
On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 22.67% vs 9.87% for XC. On fees, XC is cheaper at 0.32% per year. On volatility, XC has been the lower-risk option at 5.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 22.67% return vs 9.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XC is cheaper with a 0.32% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.
XC has the higher dividend yield at 12.41%, compared with 0.67% for EMM.
They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for XC and 0.75% for EMM.
EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 0.57), 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 XC and EMM
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