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

Performance

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XHC.TO achieves a -5.65% return, which is significantly lower than XEMC.TO's 43.62% return.


XHC.TO

1D
0.59%
1M
0.77%
YTD
-5.65%
6M
-5.54%
1Y
7.72%
3Y*
2.70%
5Y*
3.54%
10Y*
6.87%

XEMC.TO

1D
-0.54%
1M
14.95%
YTD
43.62%
6M
46.03%
1Y
79.31%
3Y*
29.96%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
XHC.TO
iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
-5.65%10.91%1.22%3.51%
XEMC.TO
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
43.62%28.28%10.87%12.07%

Correlation

The correlation between XHC.TO and XEMC.TO is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

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

0.27

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

0.27

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

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO — Risk / Return Rank

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

XHC.TO
XHC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
XHC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XHC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
XHC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
XHC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
XHC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

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
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.

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

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


XHC.TOXEMC.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.68

-0.58

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.72

6.08

-5.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.76

23.21

-21.44

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XHC.TO Sharpe Ratio is 0.54, which is lower than the XEMC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XHC.TO and XEMC.TO, 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


XHC.TOXEMC.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.54

3.85

-3.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

1.83

-1.15

Drawdowns

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XHC.TO drawdown since its inception was -27.28%, which is greater than XEMC.TO's maximum drawdown of -14.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHC.TO and XEMC.TO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XHC.TOXEMC.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.28%

-14.55%

-12.73%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.79%

-13.12%

+2.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.81%

-14.55%

-4.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.76%

-0.54%

-9.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.85%

-2.19%

-2.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.39%

3.43%

+0.96%

Volatility

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XHC.TO) is 4.76%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (XEMC.TO) has a volatility of 9.10%. This indicates that XHC.TO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XEMC.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XHC.TOXEMC.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.76%

9.10%

-4.34%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.21%

18.42%

-8.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.34%

20.69%

-6.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.87%

15.74%

-1.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.75%

15.74%

+0.01%

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

XHC.TO has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is higher than XEMC.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

XHC.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Dividend Comparison

XHC.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, more than XEMC.TO's 1.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XHC.TO
iShares Global Healthcare Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)
1.98%1.87%4.42%2.38%0.84%0.79%0.96%1.07%1.68%1.14%1.63%2.15%

Frequently Asked Questions


XHC.TO and XEMC.TO have a correlation of 0.27, 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 0.66% for XHC.TO.

XHC.TO is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while XEMC.TO is Emerging Markets Equities. XHC.TO tracks Morningstar Gbl GR CAD, while XEMC.TO tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.66% for XHC.TO and 0.25% for XEMC.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XHC.TO and XEMC.TO

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