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

Performance

XMME.L vs. XBLC.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 Xtrackers II EUR Corporate Bond UCITS ETF 1C (XBLC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMME.L is traded in USD, while XBLC.L is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the XBLC.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 28.43% return, which is significantly higher than XBLC.L's -0.31% return.


XMME.L

1D
2.93%
1M
7.15%
YTD
28.43%
6M
30.52%
1Y
52.16%
3Y*
22.98%
5Y*
7.86%
10Y*

XBLC.L

1D
0.49%
1M
1.02%
YTD
-0.31%
6M
-0.17%
1Y
2.84%
3Y*
6.80%
5Y*
-0.55%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
28.43%33.79%7.37%9.61%-20.77%-2.81%18.46%17.19%-13.78%4.14%
XBLC.L
Xtrackers II EUR Corporate Bond UCITS ETF 1C
-0.31%16.78%-2.09%10.90%-18.50%-7.79%11.60%4.21%-6.12%1.16%

Correlation

The correlation between XMME.L and XBLC.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

0.40

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

0.41

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2017

0.35

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. XBLC.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: 8383
Overall Rank
XMME.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMME.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMME.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
XMME.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMME.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

XBLC.L
XBLC.L Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
XBLC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBLC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBLC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
XBLC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBLC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
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. XBLC.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 Xtrackers II EUR Corporate Bond UCITS ETF 1C (XBLC.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


XMME.LXBLC.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.07

+0.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.01

0.43

+3.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.94

1.14

+12.80

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

The current XMME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is higher than the XBLC.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMME.L and XBLC.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...

Drawdowns

XMME.L vs. XBLC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.28%, which is greater than XBLC.L's maximum drawdown of -34.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMME.L and XBLC.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMME.LXBLC.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.28%

-34.64%

-5.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.95%

-6.55%

-6.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.04%

-8.43%

-8.61%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.33%

-32.57%

-4.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.28%

-5.88%

+4.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.37%

-11.49%

-3.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.72%

2.48%

+1.24%

Volatility

XMME.L vs. XBLC.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a higher volatility of 8.91% compared to Xtrackers II EUR Corporate Bond UCITS ETF 1C (XBLC.L) at 2.11%. This indicates that XMME.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XBLC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMME.LXBLC.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.91%

2.11%

+6.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.14%

5.75%

+12.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.57%

7.59%

+12.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.99%

9.31%

+9.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.01%

8.81%

+11.20%

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

XMME.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than XBLC.L's 0.12% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

XMME.L vs. XBLC.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XMME.L and XBLC.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.

On fees, XBLC.L is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XBLC.L is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for XMME.L.

XMME.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XBLC.L is European Corporate Bonds. XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index, while XBLC.L tracks Bloomberg Euro Corp TR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMME.L and 0.12% for XBLC.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMME.L and XBLC.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