PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMME.L vs. XUT3.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMME.L vs. XUT3.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 US Treasuries 1-3 UCITS ETF 1D (XUT3.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMME.L achieves a 26.48% return, which is significantly higher than XUT3.L's 0.54% 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*

XUT3.L

1D
0.10%
1M
-0.02%
YTD
0.54%
6M
0.96%
1Y
3.38%
3Y*
4.17%
5Y*
1.86%
10Y*
1.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMME.L vs. XUT3.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XMME.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
26.48%33.78%7.37%9.61%-20.77%-2.81%18.46%17.19%-14.47%16.38%
XUT3.L
Xtrackers II US Treasuries 1-3 UCITS ETF 1D
0.54%5.06%4.13%4.10%-3.60%-0.62%2.95%3.56%1.44%-0.12%

Correlation

The correlation between XMME.L and XUT3.L is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.19

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

0.10

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

0.07

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

-0.04

The correlation between XMME.L and XUT3.L shifts across timeframes, from -0.04 (all time) to 0.19 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. XUT3.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

XUT3.L
XUT3.L Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
XUT3.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XUT3.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
XUT3.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
XUT3.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
XUT3.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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. XUT3.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 US Treasuries 1-3 UCITS ETF 1D (XUT3.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.LXUT3.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.67

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.00

5.10

-1.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.53

20.02

-5.48

XMME.L vs. XUT3.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMME.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the XUT3.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMME.L and XUT3.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.LXUT3.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.64

3.06

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

0.98

-0.59

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

1.14

-0.70

Drawdowns

XMME.L vs. XUT3.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMME.L drawdown since its inception was -40.28%, which is greater than XUT3.L's maximum drawdown of -5.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMME.L and XUT3.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMME.LXUT3.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.28%

-5.45%

-34.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.95%

-0.67%

-12.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.04%

-0.91%

-16.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.39%

-5.45%

-31.94%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-5.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.78%

-0.12%

-2.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.45%

-0.72%

-14.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

0.17%

+3.41%

Volatility

XMME.L vs. XUT3.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a higher volatility of 8.48% compared to Xtrackers II US Treasuries 1-3 UCITS ETF 1D (XUT3.L) at 0.41%. This indicates that XMME.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XUT3.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMME.LXUT3.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.48%

0.41%

+8.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.03%

0.80%

+16.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.71%

1.13%

+18.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.80%

1.90%

+16.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.92%

1.50%

+18.42%

XMME.L vs. XUT3.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMME.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than XUT3.L's 0.06% 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. XUT3.L - Dividend Comparison

XMME.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XUT3.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
XUT3.L
Xtrackers II US Treasuries 1-3 UCITS ETF 1D
2.84%2.70%2.35%1.80%1.00%2.89%2.43%1.16%1.00%0.69%

Frequently Asked Questions


XMME.L and XUT3.L have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XUT3.L is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XUT3.L is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for XMME.L.

XMME.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XUT3.L is Government Bonds. XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index, while XUT3.L tracks iBoxx USD Treasuries 1-3 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMME.L and 0.06% for XUT3.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMME.L and XUT3.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