XCEM vs. RECS

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS).

XCEM and RECS 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. RECS is a passively managed fund by Ameriprise Financial that tracks the performance of the Beta Advantage Research Enhanced U.S. Equity Index. It was launched on Sep 25, 2019. Both XCEM and RECS are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

XCEM vs. RECS - Performance Comparison

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

XCEM vs. RECS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	7.38%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	-3.89%	19.30%	26.27%	23.19%	-14.39%	32.73%	15.35%	-0.93%	0.00%	0.00%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 7.38% return, which is significantly higher than RECS's -3.89% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has outperformed RECS with an annualized return of 10.01%, while RECS has yielded a comparatively lower 8.76% annualized 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%

RECS

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: -4.22%
• YTD: -3.89%
• 6M: -1.83%
• 1Y: 19.12%
• 3Y*: 19.05%
• 5Y*: 13.07%
• 10Y*: 8.76%

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

XCEM vs. RECS - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is higher than RECS's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

XCEM

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF

RECS

Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. RECS — 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

RECS

RECS Risk / Return Rank: 61
RECS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
RECS Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
RECS Omega Ratio Rank: 62
RECS Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
RECS Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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. RECS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS). 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	RECS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	1.06	+1.09
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.82	1.59	+1.23
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.24	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	1.57	+1.49
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.61	7.17	+5.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XCEM vs. RECS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is higher than the RECS Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and RECS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XCEM	RECS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	1.06	+1.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.80	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	0.54	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.34	+0.18

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and RECS is 0.50, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

XCEM vs. RECS - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, more than RECS's 1.16% 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%
RECS Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF	1.16%	1.11%	1.09%	1.00%	1.41%	20.64%	1.09%	0.49%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

XCEM vs. RECS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, which is greater than RECS's maximum drawdown of -34.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and RECS.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCEM	RECS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.24%	-34.29%	-6.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.46%	-12.45%	-2.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.67%	-22.08%	-7.59%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.24%	-34.29%	-6.95%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.16%	-5.69%	-4.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.70%	-1.29%	-7.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.51%	2.72%	+0.79%

Volatility

XCEM vs. RECS - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 10.37% compared to Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) at 5.08%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RECS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCEM	RECS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.37%	5.08%	+5.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.60%	9.29%	+6.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.21%	18.20%	+2.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.15%	16.40%	+0.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.53%	16.14%	+3.39%