XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

XNZN.DE (Xtrackers Nordic Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C) and AMED.DE (Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C)) are both Europe Equities funds - XNZN.DE tracks the MSCI Nordic Countries NR EUR while AMED.DE tracks the MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XNZN.DE returned 5.54%/yr vs 16.11%/yr for AMED.DE. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XNZN.DE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AMED.DE.

Performance

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in Xtrackers Nordic Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZN.DE) and Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XNZN.DE achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than AMED.DE's 16.87% return.

XNZN.DE

• 1D: 0.80%
• 1M: -0.39%
• YTD: 0.62%
• 6M: 2.71%
• 1Y: 1.15%
• 3Y*: 5.54%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMED.DE

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 5.71%
• YTD: 16.87%
• 6M: 18.51%
• 1Y: 26.18%
• 3Y*: 16.11%
• 5Y*: 10.41%
• 10Y*: 9.75%

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

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XNZN.DE Xtrackers Nordic Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C	0.62%	1.04%	3.46%	12.19%
AMED.DE Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C)	16.87%	20.15%	5.95%	4.22%

Correlation

The correlation between XNZN.DE and AMED.DE is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2023	0.75

The correlation between XNZN.DE and AMED.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

XNZN.DE

XNZN.DE Risk / Return Rank: 10
XNZN.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
XNZN.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
XNZN.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 10
XNZN.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
XNZN.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 11

AMED.DE

AMED.DE Risk / Return Rank: 53
AMED.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
AMED.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
AMED.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 53
AMED.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
AMED.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Nordic Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZN.DE) and Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE). 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.

	XNZN.DE	AMED.DE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.09	1.74	-1.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.24	2.58	-2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.33	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.11	2.49	-2.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.29	9.40	-9.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XNZN.DE Sharpe Ratio is 0.09, which is lower than the AMED.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XNZN.DE and AMED.DE, 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

	XNZN.DE	AMED.DE	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.09	1.74	-1.64
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.65	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.34	0.47	-0.13

Drawdowns

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XNZN.DE drawdown since its inception was -23.90%, smaller than the maximum AMED.DE drawdown of -38.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XNZN.DE and AMED.DE.

Drawdown Indicators

	XNZN.DE	AMED.DE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.90%	-38.35%	+14.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.08%	-10.56%	-2.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.90%	-14.07%	-9.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.13%	-0.17%	-8.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.13%	-6.69%	-0.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.84%	2.81%	+2.03%

Volatility

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Nordic Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned UCITS ETF 1C (XNZN.DE) is 4.52%, while Amundi MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select UCITS ETF DR EUR (C) (AMED.DE) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that XNZN.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMED.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XNZN.DE	AMED.DE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.52%	5.61%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.12%	12.64%	-0.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.38%	15.19%	+0.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.12%	15.87%	+0.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.12%	17.00%	-0.88%

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

XNZN.DE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than AMED.DE's 0.25% 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

XNZN.DE vs. AMED.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither XNZN.DE nor AMED.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XNZN.DE and AMED.DE in my portfolio?

XNZN.DE and AMED.DE have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XNZN.DE or AMED.DE?

On fees, XNZN.DE 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, XNZN.DE or AMED.DE?

XNZN.DE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AMED.DE.

What is the main difference between XNZN.DE and AMED.DE?

XNZN.DE tracks MSCI Nordic Countries NR EUR, while AMED.DE tracks MSCI EMU ESG Leaders Select 5% Issuer Capped. They also come from different issuers: DWS and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XNZN.DE and 0.25% for AMED.DE.