PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMJP.L (Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C) and CEA1.L (iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - XMJP.L is a Japan Equities fund tracking the TOPIX TR JPY, while CEA1.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XMJP.L returned 10.26%/yr vs 12.09%/yr for CEA1.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.

Performance

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMJP.L achieves a 16.45% return, which is significantly lower than CEA1.L's 30.56% return. Over the past 10 years, XMJP.L has underperformed CEA1.L with an annualized return of 10.26%, while CEA1.L has yielded a comparatively higher 12.09% annualized return.

XMJP.L

1D
-0.26%
1M
6.26%
YTD
16.45%
6M
15.56%
1Y
34.15%
3Y*
15.63%
5Y*
10.23%
10Y*
10.26%

CEA1.L

1D
-1.69%
1M
8.28%
YTD
30.56%
6M
33.05%
1Y
59.80%
3Y*
23.16%
5Y*
9.12%
10Y*
12.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMJP.L
Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C		16.45%17.49%9.14%13.88%-7.09%2.11%12.34%14.37%-8.64%13.19%
CEA1.L
iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)		30.56%25.23%13.67%0.79%-11.96%-4.22%23.90%13.81%-10.88%29.65%

Correlation

The correlation between XMJP.L and CEA1.L is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.41

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

0.42

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.43

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 3, 2013

0.58

The correlation between XMJP.L and CEA1.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.41 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMJP.L
CEA1.L

Industrials

26.0%
7.2%

Technology

19.1%
49.6%

Financial Services

17.5%
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
9.9%

Communication Services

7.9%
6.5%

Healthcare

6.3%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
2.2%

Basic Materials

3.0%
3.4%

Real Estate

2.3%
0.7%

Utilities

1.1%
1.4%

Energy

1.1%
2.5%

Industrials

XMJP.L
26.0%
CEA1.L
7.2%

Technology

XMJP.L
19.1%
CEA1.L
49.6%

Financial Services

XMJP.L
17.5%
CEA1.L
13.7%

Consumer Cyclical

XMJP.L
12.2%
CEA1.L
9.9%

Communication Services

XMJP.L
7.9%
CEA1.L
6.5%

Healthcare

XMJP.L
6.3%
CEA1.L
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

XMJP.L
3.6%
CEA1.L
2.2%

Basic Materials

XMJP.L
3.0%
CEA1.L
3.4%

Real Estate

XMJP.L
2.3%
CEA1.L
0.7%

Utilities

XMJP.L
1.1%
CEA1.L
1.4%

Energy

XMJP.L
1.1%
CEA1.L
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C

iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc)

Often compared with XMJP.L:
XMJP.L vs. ISJP.LXMJP.L vs. JPJP.LXMJP.L vs. DXJG.LXMJP.L vs. DXJXMJP.L vs. DBJPXMJP.L vs. CSJP.LXMJP.L vs. SXR8.DE
Often compared with CEA1.L:
CEA1.L vs. ADIVCEA1.L vs. EMV.LCEA1.L vs. XCX5.LCEA1.L vs. EMIM.LCEA1.L vs. IPACCEA1.L vs. IWDA.LCEA1.L vs. SPY

Return for Risk

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMJP.L
XMJP.L Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
XMJP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMJP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
CEA1.L
CEA1.L Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEA1.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L) and iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.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.

XMJP.LCEA1.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.88
3.23

-1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.71
4.12

-1.41

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.58

-0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.19

5.09

-1.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.22

17.73

-7.51

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMJP.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is lower than the CEA1.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMJP.L and CEA1.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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

XMJP.LCEA1.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.88

3.23

-1.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.65

0.51

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

0.65

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.53

-0.12

Drawdowns

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMJP.L drawdown since its inception was -28.91%, smaller than the maximum CEA1.L drawdown of -33.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMJP.L and CEA1.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMJP.LCEA1.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.91%

-33.94%

+5.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.65%

-11.68%

+1.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.29%

-17.35%

+3.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.48%

-28.87%

+10.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.22%

-33.94%

+9.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-2.67%

+2.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.44%

-11.09%

+3.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.33%

3.36%

-0.03%

Volatility

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C (XMJP.L) is 3.89%, while iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF (Acc) (CEA1.L) has a volatility of 8.22%. This indicates that XMJP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CEA1.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMJP.LCEA1.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.89%

8.22%

-4.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.76%

15.73%

-0.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.08%

18.45%

-0.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.78%

17.81%

-2.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.90%

18.53%

-2.63%

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XMJP.L and CEA1.L have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XMJP.L vs. CEA1.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMJP.L nor CEA1.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

XMJP.L and CEA1.L have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XMJP.L and CEA1.L have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

XMJP.L is categorized as Japan Equities, while CEA1.L is Asia Pacific Equities. XMJP.L tracks TOPIX TR JPY, while CEA1.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Ex Japan NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMJP.L and CEA1.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