PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF EUR (AMEM.DE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

XRSG.L is traded in GBp, while AMEM.DE is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the AMEM.DE values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XRSG.L achieves a 19.15% return, which is significantly higher than AMEM.DE's 17.55% return. Over the past 10 years, XRSG.L has outperformed AMEM.DE with an annualized return of 10.00%, while AMEM.DE has yielded a comparatively lower 8.46% annualized return.


XRSG.L

1D
0.23%
1M
-2.05%
6M
12.42%
YTD
19.15%
1Y
32.92%
3Y*
13.88%
5Y*
7.27%
10Y*
10.00%
ALL TIME*
6.24%

AMEM.DE

1D
1.16%
1M
-10.11%
6M
10.63%
YTD
17.55%
1Y
32.63%
3Y*
18.16%
5Y*
7.38%
10Y*
8.46%
ALL TIME*
6.01%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XRSG.L
Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C
19.15%4.65%11.80%12.16%-11.47%15.43%15.81%20.64%-7.63%4.40%
AMEM.DE
Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF EUR
17.55%25.43%8.73%3.25%-9.11%-3.38%12.44%14.93%-9.75%25.61%

Correlation

The correlation between XRSG.L and AMEM.DE 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

0.48

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

0.51

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2015

0.55

The correlation between XRSG.L and AMEM.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE — Risk / Return Rank

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

XRSG.L
XRSG.L Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
XRSG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XRSG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
XRSG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
XRSG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
XRSG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

AMEM.DE
AMEM.DE Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
AMEM.DE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMEM.DE Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMEM.DE Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
AMEM.DE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMEM.DE Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) and Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF EUR (AMEM.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


XRSG.LAMEM.DEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.30

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.81

2.64

+1.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.93

8.39

+2.54

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XRSG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is comparable to the AMEM.DE Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XRSG.L and AMEM.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XRSG.L drawdown since its inception was -48.07%, which is greater than AMEM.DE's maximum drawdown of -31.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRSG.L and AMEM.DE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XRSG.LAMEM.DEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-48.07%

-31.41%

-16.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.61%

-12.30%

+3.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.09%

-16.71%

-13.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.09%

-21.79%

-8.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.31%

-27.39%

-7.92%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.83%

-11.28%

+7.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.78%

-10.96%

-2.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.00%

3.88%

-0.88%

Volatility

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) is 4.40%, while Amundi MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF EUR (AMEM.DE) has a volatility of 8.37%. This indicates that XRSG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMEM.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XRSG.LAMEM.DEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.40%

8.37%

-3.97%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.15%

17.60%

-5.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.84%

19.75%

-2.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.62%

17.03%

+6.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.54%

18.47%

+4.07%

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison

XRSG.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than AMEM.DE's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

XRSG.L vs. AMEM.DE - Dividend Comparison

Neither XRSG.L nor AMEM.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


XRSG.L and AMEM.DE 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, AMEM.DE is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

AMEM.DE is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for XRSG.L.

XRSG.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while AMEM.DE is Emerging Markets Equities. XRSG.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while AMEM.DE tracks MSCI Emerging Markets. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for XRSG.L and 0.20% for AMEM.DE.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XRSG.L and AMEM.DE

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