XCNY vs. EMDM

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

XCNY (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and EMDM (First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds - XCNY tracks the S&P Emerging ex-China BMI while EMDM tracks the Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XCNY returned 30.73% vs 73.85% for EMDM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCNY charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMDM.

Performance

XCNY vs. EMDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCNY achieves a 14.37% return, which is significantly lower than EMDM's 28.07% return.

XCNY

• 1D: -4.45%
• 1M: -3.03%
• YTD: 14.37%
• 6M: 17.01%
• 1Y: 30.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMDM

• 1D: -6.87%
• 1M: -4.27%
• YTD: 28.07%
• 6M: 33.77%
• 1Y: 73.85%
• 3Y*: 28.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XCNY vs. EMDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	14.37%	20.42%	-3.51%
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	28.07%	59.68%	-8.16%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNY and EMDM is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2024	0.87

The correlation between XCNY and EMDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCNY vs. EMDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCNY	EMDM
Technology	36.1%	32.1%
Financial Services	21.7%	27.2%
Basic Materials	8.7%	15.1%
Industrials	7.7%	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	5.6%	6.0%
Energy	4.9%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	3.4%
Communication Services	3.5%	4.3%
Utilities	3.3%	1.9%
Healthcare	2.7%	0.5%
Real Estate	2.3%	-

Return for Risk

XCNY vs. EMDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCNY

XCNY Risk / Return Rank: 57
XCNY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
XCNY Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
XCNY Omega Ratio Rank: 59
XCNY Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
XCNY Martin Ratio Rank: 59

EMDM

EMDM Risk / Return Rank: 87
EMDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
EMDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
EMDM Omega Ratio Rank: 88
EMDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EMDM Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

XCNY vs. EMDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) and First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM). 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.

	XCNY	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	3.03	-1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	3.56	-1.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.53	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	4.74	-2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.94	19.41	-9.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XCNY vs. EMDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNY Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the EMDM Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNY and EMDM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XCNY	EMDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	3.03	-1.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.99	1.39	-0.40

Drawdowns

XCNY vs. EMDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNY drawdown since its inception was -19.70%, roughly equal to the maximum EMDM drawdown of -18.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNY and EMDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCNY	EMDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.70%	-18.81%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.86%	-15.65%	+3.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.49%	-9.10%	+3.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.14%	-4.07%	-0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	3.82%	-0.72%

Volatility

XCNY vs. EMDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) is 7.62%, while First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF (EMDM) has a volatility of 11.28%. This indicates that XCNY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCNY	EMDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.62%	11.28%	-3.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.21%	22.11%	-6.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.22%	24.51%	-7.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.04%	20.15%	-2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.04%	20.15%	-2.11%

XCNY vs. EMDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCNY has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EMDM's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCNY vs. EMDM - Dividend Comparison

XCNY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, less than EMDM's 2.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMDM First Trust Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies ETF	2.79%	3.57%	5.87%	2.16%
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	2.35%	2.68%	1.07%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCNY and EMDM in my portfolio?

XCNY and EMDM have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XCNY or EMDM?

EMDM has higher volatility (11.28%) compared to XCNY (7.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCNY dropped -19.70% vs EMDM's -18.81%.

Which ETF is better, XCNY or EMDM?

On 1-year performance, EMDM leads with 73.85% vs 30.73% for XCNY. On fees, XCNY is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XCNY has been the lower-risk option at 7.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCNY or EMDM?

Over the 1-year period, EMDM has performed better with a 73.85% return vs 30.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCNY or EMDM?

XCNY is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XCNY or EMDM?

EMDM has the higher dividend yield at 2.79%, compared with 2.35% for XCNY.

What is the main difference between XCNY and EMDM?

XCNY tracks S&P Emerging ex-China BMI, while EMDM tracks Bloomberg Emerging Market Democracies Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XCNY and 0.75% for EMDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 1.79), 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.