XMME.L vs. EMVL.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMME.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) and EMVL.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XMME.L tracks the MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index while EMVL.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMME.L returned 7.64%/yr vs 16.77%/yr for EMVL.L. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMME.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for EMVL.L.

Performance

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMME.L achieves a 28.47% return, which is significantly lower than EMVL.L's 47.62% return.

XMME.L

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 8.69%
• YTD: 28.47%
• 6M: 31.09%
• 1Y: 56.69%
• 3Y*: 24.59%
• 5Y*: 7.64%
• 10Y*: —

EMVL.L

• 1D: -1.67%
• 1M: 16.15%
• YTD: 47.62%
• 6M: 52.67%
• 1Y: 93.14%
• 3Y*: 38.74%
• 5Y*: 16.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
XMME.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C	28.47%	33.78%	7.37%	9.61%	-20.77%	-2.81%	18.46%	18.45%
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	47.62%	43.13%	14.48%	18.38%	-16.29%	5.29%	7.16%	17.77%

Correlation

The correlation between XMME.L and EMVL.L is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2019	0.88

The correlation between XMME.L and EMVL.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMME.L	EMVL.L
Technology	36.9%	44.7%
Financial Services	19.5%	13.8%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	11.5%
Industrials	7.4%	2.7%
Communication Services	7.0%	2.5%
Basic Materials	6.5%	10.0%
Energy	4.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	1.1%
Healthcare	2.9%	1.7%
Utilities	2.1%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.1%	1.8%

Return for Risk

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMME.L

XMME.L Risk / Return Rank: 83
XMME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
XMME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XMME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 84
XMME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
XMME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 80

EMVL.L

EMVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 95
EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EMVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EMVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EMVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EMVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.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.

	XMME.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.87	4.45	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	5.21	-1.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.75	-0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.35	7.86	-3.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.82	27.29	-11.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is lower than the EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMME.L and EMVL.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

	XMME.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.87	4.45	-1.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	0.84	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.83	-0.38

Drawdowns

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.28%, which is greater than EMVL.L's maximum drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMME.L and EMVL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMME.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.28%	-34.95%	-5.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.95%	-11.65%	-1.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.04%	-16.43%	-0.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.56%	-34.57%	-2.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	-1.67%	+0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.46%	-9.98%	-5.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.57%	3.38%	+0.19%

Volatility

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) is 8.38%, while iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) has a volatility of 9.27%. This indicates that XMME.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMVL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMME.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.38%	9.27%	-0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.94%	17.27%	-0.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.63%	20.61%	-0.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.79%	19.97%	-1.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.92%	22.22%	-2.30%

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMME.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than EMVL.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMME.L vs. EMVL.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMME.L nor EMVL.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMME.L and EMVL.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, XMME.L and EMVL.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, XMME.L or EMVL.L?

On fees, XMME.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMME.L or EMVL.L?

XMME.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for EMVL.L.

What is the main difference between XMME.L and EMVL.L?

XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index, while EMVL.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMME.L and 0.40% for EMVL.L.