XMMS.L vs. XMWX.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMMS.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) and XMWX.L (Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XMMS.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD, while XMWX.L is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI World ex USA Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XMMS.L returned 53.72% vs 24.92% for XMWX.L. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMMS.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for XMWX.L.

Performance

XMMS.L vs. XMWX.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 Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

XMMS.L is traded in GBp, while XMWX.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XMWX.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 higher than XMWX.L's 9.48% 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*: —

XMWX.L

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 4.79%
• YTD: 9.48%
• 6M: 9.90%
• 1Y: 24.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XMMS.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C	26.72%	24.71%	2.38%
XMWX.L Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C	9.48%	14.39%	3.50%

Correlation

The correlation between XMMS.L and XMWX.L is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 2024	0.52

The correlation between XMMS.L and XMWX.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XMMS.L vs. XMWX.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: 88
XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
XMMS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
XMMS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
XMMS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XMMS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

XMWX.L

XMWX.L Risk / Return Rank: 59
XMWX.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
XMWX.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
XMWX.L Omega Ratio Rank: 67
XMWX.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
XMWX.L Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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. XMWX.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 Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.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.L	XMWX.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.17	1.96	+1.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.07	2.68	+1.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.37	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.84	2.77	+2.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.09	9.11	+7.99
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. XMWX.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMMS.L Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is higher than the XMWX.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMMS.L and XMWX.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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMMS.L	XMWX.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.17	1.96	+1.21
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	1.17	-0.73

Drawdowns

XMMS.L vs. XMWX.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMMS.L drawdown since its inception was -27.76%, which is greater than XMWX.L's maximum drawdown of -14.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMMS.L and XMWX.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMMS.L	XMWX.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.76%	-14.94%	-12.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.04%	-8.96%	-2.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.42%	0.00%	-2.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.00%	-3.18%	-6.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.13%	2.73%	+0.40%

Volatility

XMMS.L vs. XMWX.L - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMMS.L) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.L) at 3.24%. This indicates that XMMS.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMWX.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMMS.L	XMWX.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.37%	3.24%	+4.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.36%	10.27%	+4.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.90%	12.68%	+4.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.56%	13.53%	+3.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.84%	13.53%	+5.31%

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

XMMS.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than XMWX.L's 0.15% 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

XMMS.L vs. XMWX.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMMS.L nor XMWX.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMMS.L and XMWX.L in my portfolio?

XMMS.L and XMWX.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XMMS.L or XMWX.L?

On fees, XMWX.L is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMMS.L or XMWX.L?

XMWX.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for XMMS.L.

What is the main difference between XMMS.L and XMWX.L?

XMMS.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while XMWX.L is Foreign Large Cap Equities. XMMS.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD, while XMWX.L tracks MSCI World ex USA Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for XMMS.L and 0.15% for XMWX.L.