EMCS vs QLVE
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Select ETF vs Northern Trust Emerging Markets Quality Low Volatility ETF
Which is better, EMCS or QLVE?
EMCS has been ahead.
EMCS has a lower expense ratio. EMCS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. QLVE is less concentrated, with 38.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.8%.
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 | EMCS | QLVE |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $1.1B | $17M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.45% | 3.02% |
| Holdings | 134 | 169 |
| YTD Return | +21.87%Best | +12.55% |
| 1Y Return | +32.15%Best | +18.18% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.63%Best | +17.74% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.24%Best | +7.57% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.1% | 13.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.9% | -30.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,857Best | $14,403 |
| Top 10 Weight | 52.8% | 38.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Xtrackers ETFs | Northern Trust Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2018 | Jul 15, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 16, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (7.2 years).
EMCS vs QLVE 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 7.2 years both funds cover.
EMCS vs QLVE Performance
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Select ETF (EMCS) is an ETF from Xtrackers ETFs and Northern Trust Emerging Markets Quality Low Volatility ETF (QLVE) is an ETF from Northern Trust Asset Management. Over the past year EMCS returned +32.15% while QLVE returned +18.18%. Year to date, EMCS is up 21.87% versus a gain of 12.55% for QLVE.
Over three years, EMCS compounded at +26.63% per year against +17.74% for QLVE; over five years the annualized figures are +8.24% and +7.57% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, EMCS has the edge at +8.96% annualized vs +6.26%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMCS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.1% compared with 13.1% for QLVE. 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 -44.9% for EMCS and -30.0% for QLVE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMCS charges 0.15% per year while QLVE charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $18 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMCS currently yields 1.45% against 3.02% for QLVE.
Holdings Overlap
63.0% of EMCS's money is in holdings QLVE also owns. 40.2% of QLVE's money is in holdings EMCS also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
22 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in EMCS and 135 in QLVE, against full books of 134 and 169.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for QLVE that do not appear in our book for EMCS (1.1% of the fund), and 1 for EMCS that do not appear in QLVE (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 EMCS | Weight in QLVE | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2330:TWTsmc | 19.18% | 14.72% | 4.46% |
| 005930:KRSamsung Electronics (Equity) | 10.06% | 6.81% | 3.25% |
| 000660:KRSk Hynix Inc Common Stock KRW 5000 | 7.53% | 4.82% | 2.71% |
| 0700:KYTencent Holdings Ltd Ordinary Shares | 4.44% | 2.55% | 1.89% |
| 2454:TWMediaTek Inc ORD TWD10 | 2.52% | 1.56% | 0.96% |
| 1398:HKIndustrial & Commercial Bank Manufacturing & . Ltd. | 1.19% | 2.26% | 1.07% |
| HDBK:MBHdfc Bank Limited Common Stock Inr1.0 | 1.54% | 1.05% | 0.49% |
| 0939:HKChina Construction Bank Corp Ord Hkd1 Cl H | 1.64% | 0.80% | 0.84% |
| 3988:HKBank Of China Ltd. | 1.22% | 1.17% | 0.05% |
| 2892:TWFirst Financial Holding Co Ltd | 1.37% | 0.91% | 0.46% |
63.0% of EMCS is already inside QLVE.
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, EMCS or QLVE?
EMCS has an expense ratio of 0.15% while QLVE charges 0.18%. EMCS is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EMCS or QLVE?
Over the past year EMCS returned +32.15% vs +18.18% for QLVE, so EMCS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), EMCS annualized +8.96% vs +6.26% for QLVE. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EMCS or QLVE?
EMCS has been the more volatile fund at 19.1% annualized versus 13.1% for QLVE. Worst drawdown: EMCS -44.9% vs QLVE -30.0%.
Should I hold both EMCS and QLVE?
EMCS and QLVE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 EMCS and QLVE?
63.0% of EMCS's money is in holdings QLVE also owns. 40.2% of QLVE's is in holdings EMCS also owns. They hold 22 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in EMCS and 135 in QLVE.
Which pays a higher dividend, EMCS or QLVE?
EMCS yields 1.45% while QLVE yields 3.02%, so QLVE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLVE better than EMCS?
EMCS has a lower expense ratio. EMCS led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. QLVE is less concentrated, with 38.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 52.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.