XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XMWX.L (Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C) and AEMD.L (Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)) are both exchange-traded funds - XMWX.L is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI World ex USA Index, while AEMD.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XMWX.L returned 23.79% vs 48.75% for AEMD.L. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMWX.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for AEMD.L.

Performance

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.L) and Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMWX.L achieves a 9.04% return, which is significantly lower than AEMD.L's 26.22% return.

XMWX.L

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 9.04%
• 6M: 10.78%
• 1Y: 23.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AEMD.L

• 1D: -1.61%
• 1M: 2.82%
• YTD: 26.22%
• 6M: 25.35%
• 1Y: 48.75%
• 3Y*: 21.16%
• 5Y*: 4.79%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XMWX.L Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C	9.04%	23.16%	-1.64%
AEMD.L Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D)	26.22%	32.76%	-5.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XMWX.L and AEMD.L is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 2024	0.57

The correlation between XMWX.L and AEMD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

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

AEMD.L

AEMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 86
AEMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
AEMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AEMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 89
AEMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
AEMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.L) and Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.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.

	XMWX.L	AEMD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	2.63	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	3.49	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.47	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.42	3.66	-1.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.87	13.43	-4.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMWX.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the AEMD.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMWX.L and AEMD.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

	XMWX.L	AEMD.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.04	2.63	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.25	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	0.40	+0.98

Drawdowns

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMWX.L drawdown since its inception was -12.53%, smaller than the maximum AEMD.L drawdown of -41.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMWX.L and AEMD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMWX.L	AEMD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.53%	-41.33%	+28.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	-13.64%	+3.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.79%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-38.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.37%	-2.76%	+2.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.71%	-17.80%	+16.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.67%	3.72%	-1.05%

Volatility

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C (XMWX.L) is 3.17%, while Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR EUR (D) (AEMD.L) has a volatility of 8.22%. This indicates that XMWX.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AEMD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XMWX.L	AEMD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.17%	8.22%	-5.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.72%	16.33%	-6.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.56%	18.97%	-7.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.43%	18.81%	-6.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.43%	20.39%	-7.96%

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

XMWX.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than AEMD.L's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XMWX.L vs. AEMD.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

XMWX.L and AEMD.L have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

XMWX.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for AEMD.L.

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

XMWX.L is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while AEMD.L is Emerging Markets Equities. XMWX.L tracks MSCI World ex USA Index, while AEMD.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XMWX.L and 0.20% for AEMD.L.