XRSG.L vs. XMME.L
XRSG.L (Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C) and XMME.L (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C) are both exchange-traded funds - XRSG.L is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 TR USD, while XMME.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XRSG.L returned 7.21%/yr vs 8.46%/yr for XMME.L. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XRSG.L charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for XMME.L.
Performance
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
XRSG.L is traded in GBp, while XMME.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XMME.L 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 17.87% return, which is significantly lower than XMME.L's 27.00% return.
XRSG.L
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- 4.49%
- YTD
- 17.87%
- 6M
- 15.72%
- 1Y
- 42.23%
- 3Y*
- 15.45%
- 5Y*
- 7.21%
- 10Y*
- 11.37%
XMME.L
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- 6.15%
- YTD
- 27.00%
- 6M
- 27.77%
- 1Y
- 53.60%
- 3Y*
- 21.03%
- 5Y*
- 8.46%
- 10Y*
- —
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XRSG.L Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C | 17.87% | 4.65% | 11.80% | 12.16% | -11.47% | 15.43% | 15.81% | 20.64% | -7.63% | 5.76% |
XMME.L Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C | 27.00% | 24.25% | 9.25% | 4.13% | -11.35% | -1.89% | 14.98% | 12.73% | -9.39% | 11.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between XRSG.L and XMME.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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2017 | 0.56 |
The correlation between XRSG.L and XMME.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Industrials
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Technology
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Healthcare
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Financial Services
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Consumer Cyclical
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Real Estate
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Energy
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Basic Materials
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Utilities
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Communication Services
XRSG.L
XMME.L
Consumer Defensive
XRSG.L
XMME.L
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. XMME.L — Risk / Return Rank
XRSG.L
XMME.L
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.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.
| XRSG.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.53 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.88 | 4.94 | -0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.33 | 16.72 | -2.39 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XRSG.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.49 | 2.91 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 | 0.50 | -0.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 0.44 | +0.05 |
Drawdowns
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XRSG.L drawdown since its inception was -35.31%, which is greater than XMME.L's maximum drawdown of -27.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRSG.L and XMME.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XRSG.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.31% | -27.98% | -7.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.61% | -10.80% | +2.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.09% | -15.74% | -14.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.09% | -24.54% | -5.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.31% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.03% | -2.44% | +2.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.72% | -10.03% | +1.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.94% | 3.20% | -0.26% |
Volatility
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Xtrackers Russell 2000 UCITS ETF 1C (XRSG.L) is 5.20%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C (XMME.L) has a volatility of 7.88%. This indicates that XRSG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMME.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XRSG.L | XMME.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.20% | 7.88% | -2.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.83% | 15.86% | -4.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.89% | 18.38% | -1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.04% | 17.04% | +3.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.88% | 18.93% | +1.95% |
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
XRSG.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than XMME.L's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
XRSG.L vs. XMME.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither XRSG.L nor XMME.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XRSG.L and XMME.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.
On fees, XMME.L is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMME.L is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for XRSG.L.
XRSG.L is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while XMME.L is Emerging Markets Equities. XRSG.L tracks Russell 2000 TR USD, while XMME.L tracks MSCI Total Return Net Emerging Markets Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for XRSG.L and 0.18% for XMME.L.
Find the right allocation for XRSG.L and XMME.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