PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMME.L vs. JRDM.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMME.L vs. JRDM.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 JPMorgan Global Emerging Markets Research Enhanced Index Equity (ESG) UCITS ETF USD (dist) (JRDM.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMME.L achieves a 26.48% return, which is significantly lower than JRDM.L's 28.82% return.


XMME.L

1D
-1.55%
1M
2.28%
YTD
26.48%
6M
27.58%
1Y
50.85%
3Y*
24.14%
5Y*
7.30%
10Y*

JRDM.L

1D
-1.48%
1M
5.78%
YTD
28.82%
6M
32.34%
1Y
58.51%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


Correlation

The correlation between XMME.L and JRDM.L is 0.87, 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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2023

0.58

Over the past year, XMME.L and JRDM.L have become more correlated (0.87) than their long-term average of 0.58, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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


Sectors
XMME.L
JRDM.L

Technology

36.9%
37.5%

Financial Services

19.5%
20.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
10.7%

Industrials

7.4%
6.8%

Communication Services

7.0%
7.3%

Basic Materials

6.5%
5.9%

Energy

4.1%
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
2.5%

Healthcare

2.9%
2.7%

Utilities

2.1%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.4%

Technology

XMME.L
36.9%
JRDM.L
37.5%

Financial Services

XMME.L
19.5%
JRDM.L
20.3%

Consumer Cyclical

XMME.L
9.6%
JRDM.L
10.7%

Industrials

XMME.L
7.4%
JRDM.L
6.8%

Communication Services

XMME.L
7.0%
JRDM.L
7.3%

Basic Materials

XMME.L
6.5%
JRDM.L
5.9%

Energy

XMME.L
4.1%
JRDM.L
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

XMME.L
3.0%
JRDM.L
2.5%

Healthcare

XMME.L
2.9%
JRDM.L
2.7%

Utilities

XMME.L
2.1%
JRDM.L
1.6%

Real Estate

XMME.L
1.1%
JRDM.L
0.4%

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

XMME.L vs. JRDM.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: 8080
Overall Rank
XMME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
XMME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

JRDM.L
JRDM.L Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
JRDM.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JRDM.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
JRDM.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
JRDM.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
JRDM.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

XMME.L vs. JRDM.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 JPMorgan Global Emerging Markets Research Enhanced Index Equity (ESG) UCITS ETF USD (dist) (JRDM.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.LJRDM.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.58

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.00

5.11

-1.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.53

18.41

-3.88

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

The current XMME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the JRDM.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMME.L and JRDM.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


XMME.LJRDM.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.64

3.33

-0.69

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

2.05

-1.61

Drawdowns

XMME.L vs. JRDM.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.28%, which is greater than JRDM.L's maximum drawdown of -16.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMME.L and JRDM.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMME.LJRDM.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.28%

-16.06%

-24.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.95%

-12.79%

-0.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.78%

-2.66%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.45%

-2.93%

-12.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

3.41%

+0.17%

Volatility

XMME.L vs. JRDM.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) and JPMorgan Global Emerging Markets Research Enhanced Index Equity (ESG) UCITS ETF USD (dist) (JRDM.L) have volatilities of 8.48% and 8.41%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMME.LJRDM.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.48%

8.41%

+0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.03%

16.19%

+0.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.71%

19.65%

+0.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.80%

23.26%

-4.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.92%

23.26%

-3.34%

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

XMME.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than JRDM.L's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMME.L vs. JRDM.L - Dividend Comparison

XMME.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JRDM.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%.


Frequently Asked Questions


XMME.L and JRDM.L have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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.

XMME.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for JRDM.L.

XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index, while JRDM.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMME.L and 0.30% for JRDM.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMME.L and JRDM.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