XDWM.L vs. XMME.L
XDWM.L (Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C) and XMME.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XDWM.L is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while XMME.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDWM.L returned 6.89%/yr vs 7.30%/yr for XMME.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XDWM.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for XMME.L.
Performance
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XDWM.L achieves a 15.43% return, which is significantly lower than XMME.L's 26.48% return.
XDWM.L
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 3.35%
- YTD
- 15.43%
- 6M
- 20.04%
- 1Y
- 32.13%
- 3Y*
- 15.48%
- 5Y*
- 6.89%
- 10Y*
- 10.95%
XMME.L
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- 5.18%
- YTD
- 26.48%
- 6M
- 28.66%
- 1Y
- 52.12%
- 3Y*
- 24.14%
- 5Y*
- 7.30%
- 10Y*
- —
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XDWM.L Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C | 15.43% | 26.77% | -6.34% | 14.84% | -10.00% | 15.53% | 19.91% | 23.00% | -16.57% | 18.34% |
XMME.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C | 26.48% | 33.78% | 7.37% | 9.61% | -20.77% | -2.81% | 18.46% | 17.19% | -14.47% | 16.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between XDWM.L and XMME.L 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2017 | 0.56 |
The correlation between XDWM.L and XMME.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (all time) to 0.71 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Consumer Cyclical
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Technology
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Consumer Defensive
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Industrials
XDWM.L
XMME.L
Communication Services
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
Energy
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
Financial Services
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
Healthcare
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
Real Estate
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
Utilities
XDWM.L
-
XMME.L
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
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L — Risk / Return Rank
XDWM.L
XMME.L
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L). 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.
| XDWM.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.48 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.08 | 4.00 | -1.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.00 | 14.53 | -6.53 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XDWM.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.66 | 2.64 | -0.97 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 | 0.39 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.71 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.73 | 0.44 | +0.29 |
Drawdowns
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XDWM.L drawdown since its inception was -37.37%, smaller than the maximum XMME.L drawdown of -40.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDWM.L and XMME.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XDWM.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.37% | -40.28% | +2.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.35% | -12.95% | -2.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.45% | -17.04% | -4.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.07% | -37.56% | +9.49% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.37% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.42% | -2.78% | -0.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.28% | -15.45% | +8.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | 3.58% | +0.43% |
Volatility
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World Materials UCITS ETF 1C (XDWM.L) is 7.56%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a volatility of 8.48%. This indicates that XDWM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMME.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XDWM.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.56% | 8.48% | -0.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.49% | 17.03% | -0.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.27% | 19.71% | -0.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.72% | 18.80% | +0.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.61% | 19.92% | +3.69% |
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XDWM.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than XMME.L's 0.18% 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%.
Dividends
XDWM.L vs. XMME.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XDWM.L nor XMME.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XDWM.L and XMME.L 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.
On fees, XMME.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMME.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for XDWM.L.
XDWM.L is categorized as Industrials Equities, while XMME.L is Emerging Markets Equities. XDWM.L tracks MSCI World/Materials NR USD, while XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XDWM.L and 0.18% for XMME.L.
Find the right allocation for XDWM.L and XMME.L
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