XMM.TO vs. XEMC.TO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMM.TO (iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF) and XEMC.TO (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - XMM.TO tracks the Morningstar EM GR CAD while XEMC.TO tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMM.TO returned 15.00%/yr vs 29.96%/yr for XEMC.TO. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMM.TO charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for XEMC.TO.

Performance

XMM.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMM.TO achieves a 18.98% return, which is significantly lower than XEMC.TO's 43.62% return.

XMM.TO

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: 9.35%
• YTD: 18.98%
• 6M: 17.95%
• 1Y: 27.44%
• 3Y*: 15.00%
• 5Y*: 8.00%
• 10Y*: 6.86%

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)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XMM.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF	18.98%	7.65%	16.66%	3.71%
XEMC.TO iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF	43.62%	28.28%	10.87%	12.07%

Correlation

The correlation between XMM.TO and XEMC.TO is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2023	0.52

The correlation between XMM.TO and XEMC.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (all time) to 0.63 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

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

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

XMM.TO

XMM.TO Risk / Return Rank: 69
XMM.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
XMM.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
XMM.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 78
XMM.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
XMM.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

XEMC.TO

XEMC.TO Risk / Return Rank: 93
XEMC.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
XEMC.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
XEMC.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 94
XEMC.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
XEMC.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.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.

	XMM.TO	XEMC.TO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	3.85	-1.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.24	4.72	-1.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.68	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	6.08	-2.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.25	23.21	-11.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current XMM.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is lower than the XEMC.TO Sharpe Ratio of 3.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMM.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMM.TO	XEMC.TO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.19	3.85	-1.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	1.83	-1.28

Drawdowns

XMM.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMM.TO drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, 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 XMM.TO and XEMC.TO.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMM.TO	XEMC.TO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.07%	-14.55%	-7.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.76%	-13.12%	+4.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.94%	-14.55%	+4.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-22.07%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.77%	-0.54%	-0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-2.19%	-3.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	3.43%	-0.98%

Volatility

XMM.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF (XMM.TO) is 5.38%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (XEMC.TO) has a volatility of 9.10%. This indicates that XMM.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.

Volatility by Period

	XMM.TO	XEMC.TO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.38%	9.10%	-3.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.25%	18.42%	-7.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	20.69%	-8.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.40%	15.74%	-5.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.02%	15.74%	-3.72%

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

XMM.TO has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than XEMC.TO's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMM.TO vs. XEMC.TO - Dividend Comparison

XMM.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, more than XEMC.TO's 1.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
XMM.TO iShares MSCI Min Vol Emerging Markets Index ETF	2.00%	2.37%	2.95%	2.55%	1.55%	1.91%	2.09%	2.44%	2.21%	2.09%	2.32%	2.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMM.TO and XEMC.TO in my portfolio?

XMM.TO and XEMC.TO have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XMM.TO or XEMC.TO?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMM.TO or XEMC.TO?

XEMC.TO is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for XMM.TO.

What is the main difference between XMM.TO and XEMC.TO?

XMM.TO tracks Morningstar EM GR CAD, while XEMC.TO tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.42% for XMM.TO and 0.25% for XEMC.TO.