XCEM vs. EMGF
XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and EMGF (iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index while EMGF tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCEM returned 13.36%/yr vs 11.88%/yr for EMGF. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EMGF.
Performance
XCEM vs. EMGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 43.27% return, which is significantly higher than EMGF's 32.97% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has outperformed EMGF with an annualized return of 13.36%, while EMGF has yielded a comparatively lower 11.88% annualized return.
XCEM
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 11.26%
- YTD
- 43.27%
- 6M
- 46.87%
- 1Y
- 73.75%
- 3Y*
- 27.69%
- 5Y*
- 13.15%
- 10Y*
- 13.36%
EMGF
- 1D
- 0.55%
- 1M
- 8.68%
- YTD
- 32.97%
- 6M
- 34.74%
- 1Y
- 55.99%
- 3Y*
- 27.87%
- 5Y*
- 11.39%
- 10Y*
- 11.88%
XCEM vs. EMGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 43.27% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 7.87% | 9.47% | 19.74% | -11.75% | 34.78% |
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF | 32.97% | 31.41% | 9.06% | 10.86% | -16.55% | 6.65% | 10.27% | 20.96% | -19.71% | 42.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCEM and EMGF is 0.94, 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 | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2015 | 0.78 |
The correlation between XCEM and EMGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.78 (all time) to 0.94 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XCEM vs. EMGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XCEM
EMGF
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
XCEM
EMGF
Financial Services
XCEM
EMGF
Industrials
XCEM
EMGF
Basic Materials
XCEM
EMGF
Consumer Cyclical
XCEM
EMGF
Communication Services
XCEM
EMGF
Energy
XCEM
EMGF
Consumer Defensive
XCEM
EMGF
Healthcare
XCEM
EMGF
Utilities
XCEM
EMGF
Real Estate
XCEM
EMGF
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. EMGF — Risk / Return Rank
XCEM
EMGF
XCEM vs. EMGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF). 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.
| XCEM | EMGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.48 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.13 | 4.16 | +0.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.88 | 15.36 | +4.51 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XCEM vs. EMGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, roughly equal to the maximum EMGF drawdown of -40.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and EMGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCEM | EMGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.24% | -40.23% | -1.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.46% | -13.54% | -0.92% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.92% | -17.65% | -1.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.57% | -28.20% | -1.37% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.24% | -40.23% | -1.01% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.57% | -10.02% | +1.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.72% | 3.66% | +0.06% |
Volatility
XCEM vs. EMGF - Volatility Comparison
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 12.12% compared to iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF (EMGF) at 11.17%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCEM | EMGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.12% | 11.17% | +0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.53% | 19.89% | +1.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.42% | 22.01% | +1.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.38% | 18.18% | +0.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.91% | 19.63% | +0.28% |
XCEM vs. EMGF - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than EMGF's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCEM vs. EMGF - Dividend Comparison
XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, more than EMGF's 1.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMGF iShares Edge MSCI Multifactor Emerging Markets ETF | 1.89% | 2.52% | 3.42% | 5.94% | 4.04% | 2.48% | 1.95% | 2.63% | 2.73% | 1.94% | 2.04% | 0.00% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 2.27% | 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 0.94, XCEM and EMGF 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 (12.12%) compared to EMGF (11.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs EMGF's -40.23%.
On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 13.36% vs 11.88% for EMGF. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, EMGF has been the lower-risk option at 11.17%. 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 13.36% return vs 11.88%. 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 0.45% for EMGF.
XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 1.89% for EMGF.
XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while EMGF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Diversified Multiple-Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.45% for EMGF.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.56), 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 XCEM and EMGF
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