XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

XZMD.L (Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D) and EMAD.L (State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - XZMD.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while EMAD.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Asia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XZMD.L returned 19.23%/yr vs 20.85%/yr for EMAD.L. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XZMD.L charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAD.L.

Performance

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XZMD.L achieves a 6.47% return, which is significantly lower than EMAD.L's 21.65% return.

XZMD.L

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -0.23%
• 6M: 5.35%
• YTD: 6.47%
• 1Y: 19.82%
• 3Y*: 19.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMAD.L

• 1D: -1.49%
• 1M: -7.68%
• 6M: 13.52%
• YTD: 21.65%
• 1Y: 36.28%
• 3Y*: 20.85%
• 5Y*: 6.56%
• 10Y*: 9.70%

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

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XZMD.L Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D	6.47%	17.64%	25.68%	30.78%	-14.24%
EMAD.L State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	21.65%	32.13%	11.12%	6.54%	-10.08%

Correlation

The correlation between XZMD.L and EMAD.L is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2022	0.59

The correlation between XZMD.L and EMAD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

XZMD.L

XZMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 48
XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
XZMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
XZMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 50
XZMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
XZMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 47

EMAD.L

EMAD.L Risk / Return Rank: 58
EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
EMAD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMAD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 56
EMAD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
EMAD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.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.

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.

	XZMD.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.54	-0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.09	+0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.28	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.60	2.70	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.21	8.04	-1.84

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XZMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XZMD.L and EMAD.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.

Drawdowns

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XZMD.L drawdown since its inception was -20.61%, smaller than the maximum EMAD.L drawdown of -46.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XZMD.L and EMAD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	XZMD.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.61%	-46.17%	+25.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.02%	-13.38%	+1.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.61%	-20.03%	-0.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.17%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-11.44%	+10.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.63%	-14.72%	+10.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	4.50%	-1.40%

Volatility

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D (XZMD.L) is 3.72%, while State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L) has a volatility of 9.83%. This indicates that XZMD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMAD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XZMD.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	9.83%	-6.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.68%	21.13%	-10.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.35%	23.52%	-10.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.87%	20.80%	-3.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.87%	20.15%	-3.28%

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

XZMD.L has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAD.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

XZMD.L vs. EMAD.L - Dividend Comparison

XZMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, while EMAD.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EMAD.L State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XZMD.L Xtrackers MSCI USA ESG UCITS ETF 1D	0.69%	0.78%	0.95%	0.95%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XZMD.L and EMAD.L in my portfolio?

XZMD.L and EMAD.L have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XZMD.L or EMAD.L?

On fees, XZMD.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, XZMD.L or EMAD.L?

XZMD.L is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAD.L.

What is the main difference between XZMD.L and EMAD.L?

XZMD.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while EMAD.L is Asia Pacific Equities. XZMD.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while EMAD.L tracks MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Asia Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for XZMD.L and 0.55% for EMAD.L.