XCEM vs. EMOP

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP).

XCEM and EMOP are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XCEM is a passively managed fund by Ameriprise Financial that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. It was launched on Sep 2, 2015. EMOP is an actively managed fund by AllianceBernstein. It was launched on Jun 17, 2025.

Performance

XCEM vs. EMOP - Performance Comparison

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

XCEM vs. EMOP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	7.38%	20.72%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	9.93%	16.69%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 7.38% return, which is significantly lower than EMOP's 9.93% return.

XCEM

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: -7.91%
• YTD: 7.38%
• 6M: 16.57%
• 1Y: 43.07%
• 3Y*: 17.87%
• 5Y*: 7.54%
• 10Y*: 10.01%

EMOP

• 1D: 2.13%
• 1M: -5.57%
• YTD: 9.93%
• 6M: 14.42%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XCEM vs. EMOP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than EMOP's 0.70% expense ratio.

EMOP

AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF

XCEM

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. EMOP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 91
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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. EMOP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMOP). 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	EMOP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.82	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.61	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XCEM	EMOP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	2.06	-1.55

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and EMOP is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

XCEM vs. EMOP - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, more than EMOP's 0.61% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	3.03%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%
EMOP AB Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	0.61%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

XCEM vs. EMOP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, which is greater than EMOP's maximum drawdown of -12.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and EMOP.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCEM	EMOP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.24%	-12.88%	-28.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.46%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.67%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.16%	-7.79%	-2.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.70%	-1.92%	-6.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	XCEM	EMOP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.37%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.60%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.21%	18.23%	+1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	18.23%	-1.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.53%	18.23%	+1.30%