PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XCEM vs. ECON
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XCEM vs. ECON - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 34.20% return, which is significantly higher than ECON's 31.82% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has outperformed ECON with an annualized return of 12.62%, while ECON has yielded a comparatively lower 6.38% annualized return.


XCEM

1D
-6.33%
1M
4.21%
YTD
34.20%
6M
36.41%
1Y
61.17%
3Y*
24.94%
5Y*
11.50%
10Y*
12.62%

ECON

1D
-5.13%
1M
5.11%
YTD
31.82%
6M
32.29%
1Y
58.08%
3Y*
22.38%
5Y*
6.68%
10Y*
6.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCEM vs. ECON - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
34.20%34.05%0.42%19.96%-17.59%7.87%9.47%19.74%-11.75%34.78%
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
31.82%34.15%0.22%7.51%-16.00%-14.11%20.83%17.22%-26.87%27.46%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and ECON is 0.92, 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

0.92

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

0.83

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

0.77

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

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 2, 2015

0.71

Over the past year, XCEM and ECON have become more correlated (0.92) than their long-term average of 0.71, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XCEM vs. ECON - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XCEM
ECON

Technology

37.1%
44.0%

Financial Services

22.8%
20.5%

Industrials

9.7%
6.7%

Basic Materials

6.4%
5.5%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
6.1%

Communication Services

4.2%
5.3%

Energy

3.8%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
2.9%

Healthcare

2.9%
2.6%

Utilities

1.9%
1.8%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.1%

Technology

XCEM
37.1%
ECON
44.0%

Financial Services

XCEM
22.8%
ECON
20.5%

Industrials

XCEM
9.7%
ECON
6.7%

Basic Materials

XCEM
6.4%
ECON
5.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XCEM
6.3%
ECON
6.1%

Communication Services

XCEM
4.2%
ECON
5.3%

Energy

XCEM
3.8%
ECON
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

XCEM
3.0%
ECON
2.9%

Healthcare

XCEM
2.9%
ECON
2.6%

Utilities

XCEM
1.9%
ECON
1.8%

Real Estate

XCEM
1.8%
ECON
1.1%

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

XCEM vs. ECON — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCEM
XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

ECON
ECON Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

XCEM vs. ECON - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON). 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.


XCEMECONDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.02

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.47

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.25

4.24

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.39

15.17

+1.22

XCEM vs. ECON - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the ECON Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and ECON, 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

XCEM vs. ECON - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, smaller than the maximum ECON drawdown of -45.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and ECON.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCEMECONDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.24%

-45.37%

+4.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.46%

-13.76%

-0.70%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-16.37%

-2.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.57%

-38.08%

+8.51%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.24%

-45.37%

+4.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.33%

-5.13%

-1.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.57%

-16.60%

+8.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.74%

3.84%

-0.10%

Volatility

XCEM vs. ECON - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) have volatilities of 14.01% and 13.47%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XCEMECONDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.01%

13.47%

+0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.56%

21.31%

+1.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.28%

23.50%

+0.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.60%

20.95%

-2.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.94%

21.23%

-1.29%

XCEM vs. ECON - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than ECON's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

XCEM vs. ECON - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.42%, more than ECON's 1.34% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
1.34%1.77%0.76%1.57%2.06%1.08%0.63%1.68%0.98%0.35%0.74%1.10%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
2.42%3.25%2.76%1.22%2.42%1.94%1.63%2.11%2.70%9.56%1.24%2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, XCEM and ECON move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

XCEM has higher volatility (14.01%) compared to ECON (13.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs ECON's -45.37%.

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 12.62% vs 6.38% for ECON. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, ECON has been the lower-risk option at 13.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 12.62% return vs 6.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ECON.

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.42%, compared with 1.34% for ECON.

XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while ECON tracks Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.49% for ECON.

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.48), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XCEM and ECON

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