PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMMS.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) and ISDE.L (iShares MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XMMS.L tracks the MSCI EM NR USD while ISDE.L tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Islamic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XMMS.L returned 8.45%/yr vs 14.04%/yr for ISDE.L. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMMS.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ISDE.L.

Performance

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.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 MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ISDE.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMMS.L achieves a 26.72% return, which is significantly lower than ISDE.L's 60.76% 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*
—

ISDE.L

1D
-2.79%
1M
14.45%
YTD
60.76%
6M
63.75%
1Y
109.18%
3Y*
28.97%
5Y*
14.04%
10Y*
13.94%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.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%
ISDE.L
iShares MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		60.76%30.46%-1.86%8.28%-13.53%3.61%18.62%14.85%-12.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XMMS.L and ISDE.L is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.75

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

0.75

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

0.80

The correlation between XMMS.L and ISDE.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

Sectors
XMMS.L
ISDE.L

Technology

36.9%
48.0%

Financial Services

19.5%
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
5.3%

Industrials

7.4%
8.6%

Communication Services

7.0%
0.9%

Basic Materials

6.5%
12.2%

Energy

4.1%
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
3.3%

Healthcare

2.9%
4.8%

Utilities

2.1%
2.3%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.9%

Technology

XMMS.L
36.9%
ISDE.L
48.0%

Financial Services

XMMS.L
19.5%
ISDE.L
3.7%

Consumer Cyclical

XMMS.L
9.6%
ISDE.L
5.3%

Industrials

XMMS.L
7.4%
ISDE.L
8.6%

Communication Services

XMMS.L
7.0%
ISDE.L
0.9%

Basic Materials

XMMS.L
6.5%
ISDE.L
12.2%

Energy

XMMS.L
4.1%
ISDE.L
10.1%

Consumer Defensive

XMMS.L
3.0%
ISDE.L
3.3%

Healthcare

XMMS.L
2.9%
ISDE.L
4.8%

Utilities

XMMS.L
2.1%
ISDE.L
2.3%

Real Estate

XMMS.L
1.1%
ISDE.L
0.9%

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 MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist)

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 ISDE.L:
ISDE.L vs. JRDM.LISDE.L vs. VDEM.LISDE.L vs. LEML.LISDE.L vs. VFEG.LISDE.L vs. PRAM.LISDE.L vs. EDG2.LISDE.L vs. EMVL.L

Return for Risk

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.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
ISDE.L
ISDE.L Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
ISDE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISDE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISDE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
ISDE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISDE.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.

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.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 MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ISDE.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.LISDE.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
3.17
4.61

-1.45

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
4.07
5.26

-1.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.79

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.84

8.63

-3.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.09

31.10

-14.01

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. ISDE.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is lower than the ISDE.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMMS.L and ISDE.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.LISDE.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.17

4.61

-1.45

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.53

0.79

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

—

0.72

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.45

0.36

+0.08

Drawdowns

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMMS.L drawdown since its inception was -27.76%, smaller than the maximum ISDE.L drawdown of -46.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMMS.L and ISDE.L.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

XMMS.LISDE.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.76%

-46.71%

+18.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.04%

-12.58%

+1.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.26%

-21.66%

+6.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.32%

-21.66%

-2.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-26.22%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.42%

-3.34%

+0.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.00%

-14.03%

+4.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.13%

3.50%

-0.37%

Volatility

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) is 7.37%, while iShares MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ISDE.L) has a volatility of 11.38%. This indicates that XMMS.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISDE.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

XMMS.LISDE.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.37%

11.38%

-4.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.36%

20.94%

-6.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.90%

23.54%

-6.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.56%

17.76%

-1.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.84%

19.28%

-0.44%

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

XMMS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ISDE.L's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMMS.L vs. ISDE.L - Dividend Comparison

XMMS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ISDE.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ISDE.L
iShares MSCI EM Islamic UCITS ETF USD (Dist)		1.08%1.86%2.51%2.77%2.10%1.79%0.98%1.55%1.64%1.02%1.07%2.32%
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 ISDE.L have a correlation of 0.80, 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 0.85% for ISDE.L.

XMMS.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while ISDE.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Islamic Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMMS.L and 0.85% for ISDE.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMMS.L and ISDE.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