PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XCEM vs. FLLA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XCEM vs. FLLA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA). 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 38.32% return, which is significantly higher than FLLA's 12.62% 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%

FLLA

1D
-2.69%
1M
-5.24%
YTD
12.62%
6M
11.76%
1Y
35.32%
3Y*
14.00%
5Y*
7.79%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XCEM vs. FLLA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XCEM
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
38.32%34.05%0.42%19.96%-17.59%7.87%9.47%19.74%-0.29%
FLLA
Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF
12.62%51.81%-26.89%32.71%7.78%-8.93%-15.08%19.59%-2.78%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and FLLA is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.67

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

0.64

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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2018

0.66

The correlation between XCEM and FLLA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCEM vs. FLLA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XCEM
FLLA

Financial Services

7.7%
25.9%

Communication Services

4.2%
3.9%

Utilities

1.9%
9.8%

Technology

1.1%
0.4%

Consumer Cyclical

1.1%
2.8%

Basic Materials

0.7%
19.3%

Industrials

0.4%
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

0.3%
11.0%

Energy

0.2%
11.3%

Healthcare

0.1%
1.6%

Real Estate

0.0%
3.0%

Financial Services

XCEM
7.7%
FLLA
25.9%

Communication Services

XCEM
4.2%
FLLA
3.9%

Utilities

XCEM
1.9%
FLLA
9.8%

Technology

XCEM
1.1%
FLLA
0.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XCEM
1.1%
FLLA
2.8%

Basic Materials

XCEM
0.7%
FLLA
19.3%

Industrials

XCEM
0.4%
FLLA
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

XCEM
0.3%
FLLA
11.0%

Energy

XCEM
0.2%
FLLA
11.3%

Healthcare

XCEM
0.1%
FLLA
1.6%

Real Estate

XCEM
0.0%
FLLA
3.0%

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. FLLA — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCEM
XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

FLLA
FLLA Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
FLLA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLLA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLLA Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
FLLA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLLA Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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. FLLA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA). 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.


XCEMFLLADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.29

+0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.95

3.06

+1.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.98

8.72

+11.26

XCEM vs. FLLA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 3.42, which is higher than the FLLA Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and FLLA, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XCEMFLLADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.42

1.66

+1.76

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.68

0.34

+0.33

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.66

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.23

+0.40

Drawdowns

XCEM vs. FLLA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, smaller than the maximum FLLA drawdown of -53.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and FLLA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XCEMFLLADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.24%

-53.88%

+12.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.46%

-11.59%

-2.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.92%

-27.76%

+8.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.67%

-28.32%

-1.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-10.96%

+9.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.59%

-13.48%

+4.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.57%

4.06%

-0.49%

Volatility

XCEM vs. FLLA - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 9.43% compared to Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF (FLLA) at 6.72%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLLA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XCEMFLLADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.43%

6.72%

+2.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.72%

18.23%

+0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.89%

21.33%

-0.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.75%

22.81%

-5.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.72%

27.54%

-7.82%

XCEM vs. FLLA - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than FLLA's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XCEM vs. FLLA - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, less than FLLA's 5.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLLA
Franklin FTSE Latin America ETF
5.38%6.06%7.04%5.45%9.55%7.60%2.12%3.18%0.48%0.00%0.00%0.00%
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


XCEM and FLLA have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XCEM has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to FLLA (6.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs FLLA's -53.88%.

On 5-year performance, XCEM leads with 11.95% vs 7.79% for FLLA. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, FLLA has been the lower-risk option at 6.72%. 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 11.95% return vs 7.79%. 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 0.19% for FLLA.

FLLA has the higher dividend yield at 5.38%, compared with 2.35% for XCEM.

XCEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FLLA is Latin America Equities. XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while FLLA tracks FTSE Latin America RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.19% for FLLA.

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.42 vs 1.66), 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 FLLA

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