PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMMS.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) and IAPD.L (iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS) are both exchange-traded funds - XMMS.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while IAPD.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMMS.L returned 8.45%/yr vs 12.72%/yr for IAPD.L. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMMS.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for IAPD.L.

Performance

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) and iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMMS.L achieves a 26.72% return, which is significantly higher than IAPD.L's 13.20% return.

XMMS.L

1D
-1.59%
1M
6.34%
YTD
26.72%
6M
27.92%
1Y
53.72%
3Y*
20.94%
5Y*
8.45%
10Y*
—

IAPD.L

1D
0.04%
1M
0.77%
YTD
13.20%
6M
13.76%
1Y
41.98%
3Y*
20.42%
5Y*
12.72%
10Y*
9.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
XMMS.L
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C		26.72%24.71%9.13%2.81%-10.67%-1.61%13.55%14.48%-8.71%
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		13.20%22.91%9.51%8.99%11.40%6.82%-11.63%11.98%-2.88%

Correlation

The correlation between XMMS.L and IAPD.L is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.53

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

0.62

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2018

0.62

The correlation between XMMS.L and IAPD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
XMMS.L
IAPD.L

Technology

36.9%
1.6%

Financial Services

19.5%
30.9%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
10.9%

Industrials

7.4%
7.1%

Communication Services

7.0%
4.7%

Basic Materials

6.5%
16.1%

Energy

4.1%
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
5.2%

Healthcare

2.9%
3.5%

Utilities

2.1%
4.5%

Real Estate

1.1%
10.6%

Technology

XMMS.L
36.9%
IAPD.L
1.6%

Financial Services

XMMS.L
19.5%
IAPD.L
30.9%

Consumer Cyclical

XMMS.L
9.6%
IAPD.L
10.9%

Industrials

XMMS.L
7.4%
IAPD.L
7.1%

Communication Services

XMMS.L
7.0%
IAPD.L
4.7%

Basic Materials

XMMS.L
6.5%
IAPD.L
16.1%

Energy

XMMS.L
4.1%
IAPD.L
5.1%

Consumer Defensive

XMMS.L
3.0%
IAPD.L
5.2%

Healthcare

XMMS.L
2.9%
IAPD.L
3.5%

Utilities

XMMS.L
2.1%
IAPD.L
4.5%

Real Estate

XMMS.L
1.1%
IAPD.L
10.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C

iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS

Often compared with XMMS.L:
XMMS.L vs. EMIM.LXMMS.L vs. XMME.DEXMMS.L vs. VWOXMMS.L vs. XMME.LXMMS.L vs. XCX5.LXMMS.L vs. FNDEXMMS.L vs. VGT
Often compared with IAPD.L:
IAPD.L vs. 100D.LIAPD.L vs. JEPQIAPD.L vs. NOBLIAPD.L vs. CNDX.LIAPD.L vs. IJRIAPD.L vs. VAPX.LIAPD.L vs. VOO

Return for Risk

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
XMMS.L
XMMS.L Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
IAPD.L
IAPD.L Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
IAPD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) and iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.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.

XMMS.LIAPD.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.17
3.89

-0.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.07
5.56

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.71

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

6.04

-1.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.09

20.30

-3.21

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is comparable to the IAPD.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMMS.L and IAPD.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

XMMS.LIAPD.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.17

3.89

-0.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

1.02

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.62

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.56

-0.11

Drawdowns

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMMS.L drawdown since its inception was -27.76%, smaller than the maximum IAPD.L drawdown of -52.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMMS.L and IAPD.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMMS.LIAPD.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.76%

-52.66%

+24.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.04%

-6.92%

-4.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.26%

-16.88%

+1.62%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.32%

-16.88%

-7.44%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-37.53%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.42%

-2.91%

+0.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.00%

-7.37%

-2.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

2.06%

+1.07%

Volatility

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS (IAPD.L) at 3.49%. This indicates that XMMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IAPD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMMS.LIAPD.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.37%

3.49%

+3.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.36%

8.32%

+6.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.90%

10.73%

+6.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.56%

12.44%

+4.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.84%

15.46%

+3.38%

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMMS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than IAPD.L's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMMS.L vs. IAPD.L - Dividend Comparison

XMMS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IAPD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.89%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IAPD.L
iShares Asia Pacific Dividend UCITS		4.89%5.67%6.72%7.29%8.34%7.53%4.77%7.26%7.70%6.15%5.60%8.10%
XMMS.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%

Frequently Asked Questions

XMMS.L and IAPD.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XMMS.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for IAPD.L.

XMMS.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while IAPD.L is Asia Pacific Equities. XMMS.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while IAPD.L tracks MSCI AC Asia Pacific NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMMS.L and 0.59% for IAPD.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMMS.L and IAPD.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