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

Performance

XMME.L vs. XSTR.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 GBP Overnight Rate Swap UCITS ETF 1D (XSTR.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XMME.L is traded in USD, while XSTR.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the XSTR.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 28.47% return, which is significantly higher than XSTR.L's 1.29% 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*

XSTR.L

1D
-0.27%
1M
-0.83%
YTD
1.29%
6M
2.39%
1Y
3.20%
3Y*
7.28%
5Y*
2.23%
10Y*
0.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
28.47%33.78%7.37%9.61%-20.77%-2.81%18.46%17.19%-14.47%16.38%
XSTR.L
Xtrackers II GBP Overnight Rate Swap UCITS ETF 1D
1.29%12.06%3.39%10.09%-9.58%-0.99%3.09%4.60%-5.27%3.91%

Correlation

The correlation between XMME.L and XSTR.L is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

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

0.36

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

0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2017

0.29

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. XSTR.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: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

XSTR.L
XSTR.L Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
XSTR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XSTR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
XSTR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
XSTR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
XSTR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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. XSTR.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 GBP Overnight Rate Swap UCITS ETF 1D (XSTR.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.LXSTR.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.08

+0.44

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.35

0.76

+3.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.82

1.64

+14.18

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

The current XMME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is higher than the XSTR.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMME.L and XSTR.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.LXSTR.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.87

0.46

+2.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.28

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

-0.17

+0.62

Drawdowns

XMME.L vs. XSTR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.28%, smaller than the maximum XSTR.L drawdown of -46.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMME.L and XSTR.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMME.LXSTR.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.28%

-46.49%

+6.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.95%

-4.18%

-8.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.04%

-8.00%

-9.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.56%

-24.22%

-13.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-21.29%

+20.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.46%

-31.11%

+15.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.57%

1.94%

+1.63%

Volatility

XMME.L vs. XSTR.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a higher volatility of 8.38% compared to Xtrackers II GBP Overnight Rate Swap UCITS ETF 1D (XSTR.L) at 1.83%. This indicates that XMME.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XSTR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMME.LXSTR.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.38%

1.83%

+6.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.94%

5.33%

+11.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.63%

6.96%

+12.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.79%

8.92%

+9.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.92%

9.57%

+10.35%

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

XMME.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than XSTR.L's 0.10% 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. XSTR.L - Dividend Comparison

XMME.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XSTR.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
XSTR.L
Xtrackers II GBP Overnight Rate Swap UCITS ETF 1D
4.15%4.61%5.06%4.05%0.33%0.02%0.56%0.97%0.61%0.19%1.19%0.78%

Frequently Asked Questions


XMME.L and XSTR.L have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XSTR.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XSTR.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for XMME.L.

XMME.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XSTR.L is Money Market. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMME.L and 0.10% for XSTR.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMME.L and XSTR.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