XCEM vs. ECON

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and ECON (Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from Ameriprise Financial - XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index while ECON tracks the Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCEM returned 12.99%/yr vs 6.10%/yr for ECON. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ECON.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 38.32% return, which is significantly higher than ECON's 35.02% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has outperformed ECON with an annualized return of 12.99%, while ECON has yielded a comparatively lower 6.10% annualized return.

XCEM

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 12.13%
• YTD: 38.32%
• 6M: 44.13%
• 1Y: 71.14%
• 3Y*: 26.37%
• 5Y*: 11.95%
• 10Y*: 12.99%

ECON

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: 13.52%
• YTD: 35.02%
• 6M: 38.26%
• 1Y: 65.21%
• 3Y*: 23.87%
• 5Y*: 7.11%
• 10Y*: 6.10%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCEM vs. ECON - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	38.32%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%
ECON Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF	35.02%	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 0.91, 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	0.91
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 3, 2015	0.71

Over the past year, XCEM and ECON have become more correlated (0.91) than their long-term average of 0.71, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XCEM vs. ECON - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCEM	ECON
Financial Services	7.7%	24.5%
Communication Services	4.2%	10.2%
Utilities	1.9%	1.4%
Technology	1.1%	30.4%
Consumer Cyclical	1.1%	8.6%
Basic Materials	0.7%	7.1%
Industrials	0.4%	6.5%
Consumer Defensive	0.3%	3.5%
Energy	0.2%	3.5%
Healthcare	0.1%	2.8%
Real Estate	0.0%	1.4%

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: 90
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

ECON

ECON Risk / Return Rank: 88
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 90
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

	XCEM	ECON	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.42	3.22	+0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.27	4.16	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.58	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.95	4.76	+0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.98	17.83	+2.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XCEM vs. ECON - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is comparable to the ECON Sharpe Ratio of 3.22. 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XCEM	ECON	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.42	3.22	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.68	0.35	+0.32
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	0.29	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.63	0.24	+0.40

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCEM	ECON	Difference
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	-29.67%	-38.08%	+8.41%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.24%	-45.37%	+4.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	-1.24%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.59%	-16.65%	+8.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.57%	3.67%	-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 9.43% and 9.10%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	XCEM	ECON	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.43%	9.10%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.72%	17.65%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.89%	20.38%	+0.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.75%	20.28%	-2.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.72%	21.03%	-1.31%

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 2.35%, more than ECON's 1.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ECON Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF	1.31%	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	2.35%	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

Can I hold both XCEM and ECON in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, 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.

Which is riskier, XCEM or ECON?

XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to ECON (9.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs ECON's -45.37%.

Which ETF is better, XCEM or ECON?

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 12.99% vs 6.10% for ECON. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, ECON has been the lower-risk option at 9.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCEM or ECON?

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 12.99% return vs 6.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCEM or ECON?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XCEM or ECON?

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.35%, compared with 1.31% for ECON.

What is the main difference between XCEM and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 3.22), 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.