XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMEM.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C) and PRAM.L (Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, from Xtrackers and Amundi respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMEM.L returned 20.58%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for PRAM.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMEM.L charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for PRAM.L.

Performance

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XMEM.L is traded in GBp, while PRAM.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the PRAM.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XMEM.L having a 25.99% return and PRAM.L slightly lower at 24.77%.

XMEM.L

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: 6.19%
• YTD: 25.99%
• 6M: 27.99%
• 1Y: 53.69%
• 3Y*: 20.58%
• 5Y*: 8.31%
• 10Y*: 10.73%

PRAM.L

• 1D: -1.56%
• 1M: 5.71%
• YTD: 24.77%
• 6M: 26.35%
• 1Y: 51.29%
• 3Y*: 20.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XMEM.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C	25.99%	24.74%	8.98%	2.98%	-10.70%	0.16%
PRAM.L Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C)	24.77%	23.16%	9.01%	3.99%	-8.64%	0.00%

Correlation

The correlation between XMEM.L and PRAM.L is 0.95, 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.68

Over the past year, XMEM.L and PRAM.L have become more correlated (0.95) than their long-term average of 0.68, meaning their price movements have been converging.

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMEM.L	PRAM.L
Technology	36.9%	40.7%
Financial Services	19.5%	17.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	9.1%
Industrials	7.5%	8.3%
Communication Services	6.9%	6.1%
Basic Materials	6.6%	5.8%
Energy	4.1%	3.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	2.8%
Healthcare	2.9%	2.8%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.0%	1.1%

Return for Risk

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMEM.L

XMEM.L Risk / Return Rank: 89
XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
XMEM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
XMEM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XMEM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XMEM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 85

PRAM.L

PRAM.L Risk / Return Rank: 78
PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PRAM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
PRAM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PRAM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) and Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.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.

	XMEM.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.14	2.84	+0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.04	3.64	+0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.52	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.87	4.98	-0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.24	16.58	+0.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMEM.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.14, which is comparable to the PRAM.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMEM.L and PRAM.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMEM.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.14	2.84	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.82	-0.53

Drawdowns

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMEM.L drawdown since its inception was -54.53%, which is greater than PRAM.L's maximum drawdown of -15.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMEM.L and PRAM.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMEM.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.53%	-15.77%	-38.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.96%	-10.26%	-0.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.33%	-15.77%	+0.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.94%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-2.78%	+0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.73%	-4.79%	-6.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	3.08%	+0.02%

Volatility

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XMEM.L) is 7.37%, while Amundi Prime Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR (C) (PRAM.L) has a volatility of 7.80%. This indicates that XMEM.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PRAM.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMEM.L	PRAM.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.37%	7.80%	-0.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.54%	15.43%	-0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.04%	18.02%	-0.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.89%	18.89%	-2.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.31%	18.89%	-0.58%

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMEM.L has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than PRAM.L's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMEM.L vs. PRAM.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMEM.L nor PRAM.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMEM.L and PRAM.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, XMEM.L and PRAM.L 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.

Which ETF is better, XMEM.L or PRAM.L?

On fees, PRAM.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMEM.L or PRAM.L?

PRAM.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for XMEM.L.

What is the main difference between XMEM.L and PRAM.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for XMEM.L and 0.10% for PRAM.L.