PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XCEM vs. EMXF

Last updated Aug 4, 2026
Documentation

XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and EMXF (iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index while EMXF tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Choice ESG Screened 5% Issuer Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCEM returned 9.92%/yr vs 7.31%/yr for EMXF. Their 0.79 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.16% expense ratio.

Performance

XCEM vs. EMXF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF (EMXF). 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 24.71% return, which is significantly higher than EMXF's 20.80% return.

XCEM

1D
0.95%
1M
-5.51%
6M
13.55%
YTD
24.71%
1Y
46.19%
3Y*
21.41%
5Y*
9.92%
10Y*
10.65%
ALL TIME*
11.40%

EMXF

1D
1.16%
1M
-1.15%
6M
12.33%
YTD
20.80%
1Y
35.33%
3Y*
18.61%
5Y*
7.31%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
10.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

EMXF

iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF
$738.61K$566.62K$456.04K

XCEM

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
$7.04M$7.53M$9.61M

XCEM vs. EMXF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF		24.71%34.05%0.42%19.96%-17.59%7.87%20.81%
EMXF
iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF		20.80%29.40%8.03%6.63%-18.99%4.45%15.65%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and EMXF is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.93

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.79

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 13, 2020

0.79

The correlation between XCEM and EMXF shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (5 years) to 0.93 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XCEM vs. EMXF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XCEM
EMXF

Technology

50.4%
32.4%

Financial Services

17.2%
34.8%

Industrials

9.6%
6.1%

Basic Materials

5.2%
2.5%

Consumer Cyclical

4.6%
6.2%

Communication Services

3.2%
9.3%

Energy

3.1%
0.0%

Healthcare

2.3%
3.9%

Utilities

1.8%
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

1.8%
2.6%

Real Estate

0.9%
1.6%

Technology

XCEM
50.4%
EMXF
32.4%

Financial Services

XCEM
17.2%
EMXF
34.8%

Industrials

XCEM
9.6%
EMXF
6.1%

Basic Materials

XCEM
5.2%
EMXF
2.5%

Consumer Cyclical

XCEM
4.6%
EMXF
6.2%

Communication Services

XCEM
3.2%
EMXF
9.3%

Energy

XCEM
3.1%
EMXF
0.0%

Healthcare

XCEM
2.3%
EMXF
3.9%

Utilities

XCEM
1.8%
EMXF
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

XCEM
1.8%
EMXF
2.6%

Real Estate

XCEM
0.9%
EMXF
1.6%

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 ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF

Often compared with XCEM:
XCEM vs. EMXCXCEM vs. KEMXXCEM vs. VWOXCEM vs. SPEMXCEM vs. XCXCEM vs. EDIVXCEM vs. EMGF
Often compared with EMXF:
EMXF vs. LDEMEMXF vs. EEMEMXF vs. VXUSEMXF vs. ESGEEMXF vs. SPEMEMXF vs. VSGXEMXF vs. AVEM

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. EMXF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
XCEM
XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
EMXF
EMXF Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
EMXF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMXF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMXF Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
EMXF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMXF Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XCEM vs. EMXF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

XCEMEMXFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.76
1.65

+0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.30
2.26

+0.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.30

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.55

2.83

-0.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.98

8.87

+0.11

XCEM vs. EMXF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the EMXF Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and EMXF, 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. EMXF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, which is greater than EMXF's maximum drawdown of -33.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and EMXF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XCEMEMXFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.24%

-33.13%

-8.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.20%

-12.53%

-5.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-15.93%

-2.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.57%

-31.72%

+2.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.24%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.95%

-6.80%

-6.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.58%

-11.83%

+3.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.16%

3.99%

+1.17%

Volatility

XCEM vs. EMXF - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 10.15% compared to iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF (EMXF) at 7.61%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMXF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XCEMEMXFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.15%

7.61%

+2.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

24.63%

19.61%

+5.02%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.40%

21.53%

+4.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.09%

22.64%

-3.55%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.11%

22.03%

-1.92%

XCEM vs. EMXF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XCEM and EMXF have an expense ratio of 0.16%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XCEM vs. EMXF - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, less than EMXF's 2.75% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMXF
iShares ESG Advanced MSCI EM ETF		2.75%3.43%2.92%2.25%2.42%1.87%0.41%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF		2.61%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 0.93, XCEM and EMXF 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 (10.15%) compared to EMXF (7.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs EMXF's -33.13%.

On 5-year performance, XCEM leads with 9.92% vs 7.31% for EMXF. Both ETFs have the same 0.16% expense ratio. On volatility, EMXF has been the lower-risk option at 7.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 9.92% return vs 7.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XCEM and EMXF have the same expense ratio: 0.16% per year.

EMXF has the higher dividend yield at 2.75%, compared with 2.61% for XCEM.

XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while EMXF tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Choice ESG Screened 5% Issuer Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Columbia and iShares.

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.65), 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 EMXF

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