PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO

Last updated Aug 5, 2026
Documentation

XEM.TO (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF) and EMCL.NEO (Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. XEM.TO is passively managed, while EMCL.NEO is actively managed. Over the past year, XEM.TO returned 42.18% vs 43.02% for EMCL.NEO. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XEM.TO charges 0.83%/yr vs 1.83%/yr for EMCL.NEO.

Performance

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF (XEM.TO) and Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF (EMCL.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XEM.TO having a 24.24% return and EMCL.NEO slightly lower at 24.18%.

XEM.TO

1D
3.29%
1M
-3.14%
6M
15.01%
YTD
24.24%
1Y
42.18%
3Y*
21.86%
5Y*
9.41%
10Y*
8.71%
ALL TIME*
7.54%

EMCL.NEO

1D
4.56%
1M
0.01%
6M
17.22%
YTD
24.18%
1Y
43.02%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
22.27%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

EMCL.NEO

Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF
CA$76.62KCA$60.32KCA$48.53K

XEM.TO

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF
CA$2.91MCA$2.81MCA$3.10M

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
XEM.TO
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF		24.24%27.25%4.74%
EMCL.NEO
Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF		24.18%20.46%3.66%

Correlation

The correlation between XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO is 0.93, 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.

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2024

0.77

The correlation between XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (all time) to 0.93 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XEM.TO
EMCL.NEO

Technology

45.2%
46.9%

Financial Services

18.5%
17.9%

Consumer Cyclical

7.5%
5.8%

Industrials

6.3%
6.8%

Communication Services

6.0%
5.7%

Basic Materials

5.5%
6.3%

Energy

3.2%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

2.6%
2.5%

Healthcare

2.5%
1.9%

Utilities

1.8%
1.8%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.0%

Technology

XEM.TO
45.2%
EMCL.NEO
46.9%

Financial Services

XEM.TO
18.5%
EMCL.NEO
17.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XEM.TO
7.5%
EMCL.NEO
5.8%

Industrials

XEM.TO
6.3%
EMCL.NEO
6.8%

Communication Services

XEM.TO
6.0%
EMCL.NEO
5.7%

Basic Materials

XEM.TO
5.5%
EMCL.NEO
6.3%

Energy

XEM.TO
3.2%
EMCL.NEO
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

XEM.TO
2.6%
EMCL.NEO
2.5%

Healthcare

XEM.TO
2.5%
EMCL.NEO
1.9%

Utilities

XEM.TO
1.8%
EMCL.NEO
1.8%

Real Estate

XEM.TO
1.0%
EMCL.NEO
1.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF

Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF

Often compared with XEM.TO:
XEM.TO vs. XEC.TOXEM.TO vs. XEF.TOXEM.TO vs. XEQT.TOXEM.TO vs. ZEA.TOXEM.TO vs. VEE.TOXEM.TO vs. VOOXEM.TO vs. VXC.TO
Often compared with EMCL.NEO:
EMCL.NEO vs. EQCC.TOEMCL.NEO vs. EQCL.TOEMCL.NEO vs. BKCL.TOEMCL.NEO vs. ZWC.TOEMCL.NEO vs. EACC.NEOEMCL.NEO vs. BKCC.TOEMCL.NEO vs. HEQT.TO

Return for Risk

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
XEM.TO
XEM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
XEM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
XEM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
EMCL.NEO
EMCL.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
EMCL.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMCL.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMCL.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
EMCL.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMCL.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF (XEM.TO) and Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF (EMCL.NEO). 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.

XEM.TOEMCL.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.76
1.71

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.31
2.19

+0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.34

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.84

2.85

-0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.23

9.43

-0.20

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the EMCL.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO, 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...

Drawdowns

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEM.TO drawdown since its inception was -35.27%, which is greater than EMCL.NEO's maximum drawdown of -19.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XEM.TOEMCL.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.27%

-19.73%

-15.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.90%

-15.37%

+0.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.30%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.79%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.27%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.74%

-6.72%

-1.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.46%

-2.90%

-7.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.58%

4.62%

-0.04%

Volatility

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF (XEM.TO) is 9.34%, while Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF (EMCL.NEO) has a volatility of 11.76%. This indicates that XEM.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMCL.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XEM.TOEMCL.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.34%

11.76%

-2.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.12%

24.11%

-1.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.14%

25.67%

-1.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.86%

24.25%

-6.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.52%

24.25%

-5.73%

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEM.TO has a 0.83% expense ratio, which is lower than EMCL.NEO's 1.83% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEM.TO vs. EMCL.NEO - Dividend Comparison

XEM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than EMCL.NEO's 10.84% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMCL.NEO
Global X Enhanced MSCI Emerging Markets Covered Call ETF		10.84%9.86%3.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XEM.TO
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Index ETF		1.46%1.90%2.08%2.39%2.10%1.91%1.28%2.56%1.95%1.78%1.97%2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

With a correlation of 0.93, XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

On fees, XEM.TO is cheaper at 0.83% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEM.TO is cheaper with a 0.83% expense ratio, compared with 1.83% for EMCL.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.83% for XEM.TO and 1.83% for EMCL.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEM.TO and EMCL.NEO

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