DMXU vs NUDM
Xtrackers Bloomberg Developed Markets ex US Equity ETF vs Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF
Which is better, DMXU or NUDM?
Nearly the same fund. DMXU costs less.
DMXU has a lower expense ratio. NUDM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. DMXU is less concentrated, with 16.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 23.4%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | DMXU | NUDM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.27% |
| AUM | $65M | $869M |
| Dividend Yield | 3.87% | 5.02% |
| Holdings | 360 | 188 |
| YTD Return | +5.39% | +6.62%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.30% | +10.96%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.70% | +18.10%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.53% | +8.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.2%Best | 16.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -32.3% | -32.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,720 | $14,940Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 16.2%Best | 23.4% |
| Fund Family | Xtrackers ETFs | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 5, 2018 | Jun 6, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 2, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (7.9 years).
DMXU vs NUDM growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 7.9 years both funds cover.
DMXU vs NUDM Performance
Xtrackers Bloomberg Developed Markets ex US Equity ETF (DMXU) is an ETF from Xtrackers ETFs and Nuveen ESG International Developed Markets Equity ETF (NUDM) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year DMXU returned +10.30% while NUDM returned +10.96%. Year to date, DMXU is up 5.39% versus a gain of 6.62% for NUDM.
Over three years, DMXU compounded at +14.70% per year against +18.10% for NUDM; over five years the annualized figures are +6.53% and +8.36% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, NUDM has the edge at +9.71% annualized vs +8.04%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NUDM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 16.2% for DMXU. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -32.3% for DMXU and -32.0% for NUDM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DMXU charges 0.03% per year while NUDM charges 0.27%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $27 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DMXU currently yields 3.87% against 5.02% for NUDM.
Holdings Overlap
19.0% of DMXU's money is in holdings NUDM also owns. 68.5% of NUDM's money is in holdings DMXU also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
98 positions in common, counted across the 624 positions we hold weights for in DMXU and 155 in NUDM, against full books of 360 and 188.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for NUDM that do not appear in our book for DMXU (2.3% of the fund), and 7 for DMXU that do not appear in NUDM (1.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in DMXU | Weight in NUDM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NOVN:SMNovartis Ag Ordinary Shares | 1.01% | 2.30% | 1.29% |
| SAP:SGSap Se | 0.77% | 2.04% | 1.27% |
| 8035:JPTokyo Electron Ltd. Com Stk | 0.65% | 2.00% | 1.35% |
| 8316:TKSumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc | 0.59% | 2.04% | 1.45% |
| CBA:AUCommonwealth Bank Of Australia | 0.68% | 1.84% | 1.16% |
| ABBN:SMAbb Ltd.[Abbn] | 0.59% | 1.88% | 1.29% |
| IBE:MAIberdrola Sa | 0.58% | 1.67% | 1.09% |
| 6758:JPSony Group Corp. | 0.53% | 1.60% | 1.07% |
| ISP:MIIntesa Sanpaolo SpA Shs | 0.42% | 1.65% | 1.23% |
| NESN:SMNestle Sa | 0.89% | 1.10% | 0.21% |
68.5% of NUDM is already inside DMXU.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, DMXU or NUDM?
DMXU has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NUDM charges 0.27%. DMXU is the cheaper option, by $24 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DMXU or NUDM?
Over the past year DMXU returned +10.30% vs +10.96% for NUDM, so NUDM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), DMXU annualized +8.04% vs +9.71% for NUDM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DMXU or NUDM?
NUDM has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 16.2% for DMXU. Worst drawdown: DMXU -32.3% vs NUDM -32.0%.
Should I hold both DMXU and NUDM?
DMXU and NUDM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between DMXU and NUDM?
68.5% of NUDM's money is in holdings DMXU also owns. 68.5% of NUDM's is in holdings DMXU also owns. They hold 98 positions in common, counted across the 624 positions we hold weights for in DMXU and 155 in NUDM.
Which pays a higher dividend, DMXU or NUDM?
DMXU yields 3.87% while NUDM yields 5.02%, so NUDM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NUDM better than DMXU?
DMXU has a lower expense ratio. NUDM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. DMXU is less concentrated, with 16.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 23.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.