XCNY vs. FRDM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

XCNY (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and FRDM (Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XCNY tracks the S&P Emerging ex-China BMI while FRDM tracks the Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XCNY returned 28.31% vs 65.50% for FRDM. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XCNY charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FRDM.

Performance

XCNY vs. FRDM - 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 Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCNY achieves a 15.72% return, which is significantly lower than FRDM's 28.12% return.

XCNY

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: -2.62%
• 6M: 10.07%
• YTD: 15.72%
• 1Y: 28.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.79%

FRDM

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -4.87%
• 6M: 13.53%
• YTD: 28.12%
• 1Y: 65.50%
• 3Y*: 29.15%
• 5Y*: 17.22%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.90%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	$22.77M	$21.45M	$25.02M
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	$13.05K	$15.72K	$16.80K

XCNY vs. FRDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	15.72%	20.42%	-3.63%
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	28.12%	61.27%	-4.25%

Correlation

The correlation between XCNY and FRDM is 0.87, 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.	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2024	0.85

The correlation between XCNY and FRDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

XCNY vs. FRDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCNY	FRDM
Technology	39.5%	8.5%
Financial Services	21.5%	15.3%
Basic Materials	7.9%	3.4%
Industrials	7.6%	0.3%
Consumer Cyclical	5.3%	3.6%
Energy	4.1%	1.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	0.9%
Communication Services	3.3%	0.3%
Utilities	3.0%	1.2%
Healthcare	2.6%	0.1%
Real Estate	2.1%	2.3%

Return for Risk

XCNY vs. FRDM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XCNY

XCNY Risk / Return Rank: 65
XCNY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
XCNY Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
XCNY Omega Ratio Rank: 64
XCNY Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
XCNY Martin Ratio Rank: 66

FRDM

FRDM Risk / Return Rank: 85
FRDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FRDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FRDM Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FRDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FRDM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

XCNY vs. FRDM - 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 Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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.

	XCNY	FRDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	2.13	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	2.63	-0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.37	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.40	3.39	-0.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.99	11.29	-3.30

XCNY vs. FRDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCNY Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is lower than the FRDM Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCNY and FRDM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XCNY vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCNY drawdown since its inception was -19.70%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCNY and FRDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCNY	FRDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.70%	-40.49%	+20.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.86%	-19.24%	+7.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.26%	-14.15%	+7.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.14%	-7.13%	+2.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.56%	5.77%	-2.21%

Volatility

XCNY vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (XCNY) is 6.99%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 12.28%. This indicates that XCNY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCNY	FRDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.99%	12.28%	-5.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.56%	28.47%	-10.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.13%	30.66%	-11.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.65%	22.38%	-3.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.65%	23.62%	-4.97%

XCNY vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCNY has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCNY vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison

XCNY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, more than FRDM's 1.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF	1.69%	2.26%	2.53%	2.66%	2.72%	2.17%	1.11%	1.07%
XCNY SPDR S&P Emerging Markets ex-China ETF	2.31%	2.68%	1.07%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCNY and FRDM in my portfolio?

XCNY and FRDM have a correlation of 0.87, 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 FRDM?

FRDM has higher volatility (12.28%) compared to XCNY (6.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCNY dropped -19.70% vs FRDM's -40.49%.

Which ETF is better, XCNY or FRDM?

On 1-year performance, FRDM leads with 65.50% vs 28.31% for XCNY. On fees, XCNY is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XCNY has been the lower-risk option at 6.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCNY or FRDM?

Over the 1-year period, FRDM has performed better with a 65.50% return vs 28.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCNY or FRDM?

XCNY is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for FRDM.

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

XCNY has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 1.69% for FRDM.

What is the main difference between XCNY and FRDM?

XCNY tracks S&P Emerging ex-China BMI, while FRDM tracks Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XCNY and 0.49% for FRDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FRDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.13 vs 1.49), 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.