PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XEMC.TO vs. FRDM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (XEMC.TO) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XEMC.TO is traded in CAD, while FRDM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FRDM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEMC.TO achieves a 43.62% return, which is significantly lower than FRDM's 46.46% return.


XEMC.TO

1D
-0.54%
1M
14.95%
YTD
43.62%
6M
46.03%
1Y
79.31%
3Y*
29.96%
5Y*
10Y*

FRDM

1D
-0.89%
1M
19.40%
YTD
46.46%
6M
52.57%
1Y
100.00%
3Y*
38.67%
5Y*
22.71%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
XEMC.TO
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
43.62%28.28%10.87%12.07%
FRDM
Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
46.46%53.88%10.44%12.18%

Correlation

The correlation between XEMC.TO and FRDM is 0.86, 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

0.86

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2023

0.73

The correlation between XEMC.TO and FRDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (all time) to 0.86 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XEMC.TO
XEMC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
XEMC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEMC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEMC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
XEMC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEMC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

FRDM
FRDM Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
FRDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FRDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
FRDM Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FRDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
FRDM Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (XEMC.TO) 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.


XEMC.TOFRDMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.68

1.72

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.08

6.55

-0.47

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

23.21

25.28

-2.07

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEMC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 3.85, which is comparable to the FRDM Sharpe Ratio of 4.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEMC.TO 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XEMC.TOFRDMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.85

4.25

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.83

1.00

+0.82

Drawdowns

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEMC.TO drawdown since its inception was -14.55%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -33.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEMC.TO and FRDM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XEMC.TOFRDMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.55%

-33.94%

+19.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.12%

-15.35%

+2.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.55%

-15.35%

+0.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.15%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.54%

-0.89%

+0.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.19%

-5.55%

+3.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.43%

3.97%

-0.54%

Volatility

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (XEMC.TO) is 9.10%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 10.89%. This indicates that XEMC.TO 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XEMC.TOFRDMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.10%

10.89%

-1.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.42%

21.00%

-2.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.69%

23.69%

-3.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.74%

18.21%

-2.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.74%

19.96%

-4.22%

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEMC.TO has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

XEMC.TO vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison

XEMC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%, more than FRDM's 1.51% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
FRDM
Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
1.51%2.26%2.53%2.66%2.72%2.17%1.11%1.07%
XEMC.TO
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
1.72%2.48%2.28%1.67%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


XEMC.TO and FRDM have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XEMC.TO is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XEMC.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for FRDM.

XEMC.TO is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FRDM is Emerging Markets Diversified. XEMC.TO tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index (Net), while FRDM tracks Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for XEMC.TO and 0.49% for FRDM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XEMC.TO and FRDM

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