PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XCEM vs. EMXC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XCEM vs. EMXC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, from Ameriprise Financial and iShares respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCEM returned 11.50%/yr vs 12.43%/yr for EMXC. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

XCEM vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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 lower than EMXC's 37.89% 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%

EMXC

1D
-6.44%
1M
4.83%
YTD
37.89%
6M
39.80%
1Y
67.97%
3Y*
27.65%
5Y*
12.43%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCEM vs. EMXC - 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%9.77%
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF		37.89%35.14%2.68%18.96%-19.56%8.54%12.76%15.80%-12.96%7.16%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and EMXC is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.98

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

0.98

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

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2017

0.89

The correlation between XCEM and EMXC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCEM vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XCEM
EMXC

Technology

37.1%
52.4%

Financial Services

22.8%
17.4%

Industrials

9.7%
6.9%

Basic Materials

6.4%
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
4.1%

Communication Services

4.2%
3.0%

Energy

3.8%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
2.4%

Healthcare

2.9%
1.8%

Utilities

1.9%
1.9%

Real Estate

1.8%
0.8%

Technology

XCEM
37.1%
EMXC
52.4%

Financial Services

XCEM
22.8%
EMXC
17.4%

Industrials

XCEM
9.7%
EMXC
6.9%

Basic Materials

XCEM
6.4%
EMXC
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XCEM
6.3%
EMXC
4.1%

Communication Services

XCEM
4.2%
EMXC
3.0%

Energy

XCEM
3.8%
EMXC
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

XCEM
3.0%
EMXC
2.4%

Healthcare

XCEM
2.9%
EMXC
1.8%

Utilities

XCEM
1.9%
EMXC
1.9%

Real Estate

XCEM
1.8%
EMXC
0.8%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF

Often compared with XCEM:
XCEM vs. KEMXXCEM vs. VWOXCEM vs. SPEMXCEM vs. EDIVXCEM vs. XCXCEM vs. EMGFXCEM vs. VEIEX
Often compared with EMXC:
EMXC vs. IEMGEMXC vs. VWOEMXC vs. EEMEMXC vs. SPEMEMXC vs. VEXCEMXC vs. VNMEMXC vs. EMM

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. EMXC — 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
EMXC
EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

XCEMEMXCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.53
2.70

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.12
3.23

-0.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.50

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.25

4.74

-0.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.39

18.14

-1.75

XCEM vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and EMXC, 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. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, roughly equal to the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and EMXC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCEMEMXCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.24%

-42.81%

+1.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.46%

-14.41%

-0.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-19.12%

+0.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.57%

-28.91%

-0.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.24%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.33%

-6.44%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.57%

-10.15%

+1.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.74%

3.76%

-0.02%

Volatility

XCEM vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) have volatilities of 14.01% and 14.74%, 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

XCEMEMXCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.01%

14.74%

-0.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.56%

23.44%

-0.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.28%

25.27%

-0.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.60%

18.40%

+0.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.94%

20.25%

-0.31%

XCEM vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

XCEM vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.42%, more than EMXC's 1.93% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMXC
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF		1.93%2.82%2.69%1.83%2.85%1.78%1.45%3.25%2.63%0.99%0.00%0.00%
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 0.98, XCEM and EMXC 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.

EMXC has higher volatility (14.74%) compared to XCEM (14.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 12.43% vs 11.50% for XCEM. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, XCEM has been the lower-risk option at 14.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 12.43% return vs 11.50%. 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 EMXC.

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.42%, compared with 1.93% for EMXC.

Both ETFs track MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.49% for EMXC.

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.53), 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 EMXC

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