3199.HK vs. SEMB.L

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (SEMB.L).

3199.HK and SEMB.L are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. 3199.HK is a passively managed fund by CSOP that tracks the performance of the FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond. It was launched on Feb 24, 2022. SEMB.L is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD. It was launched on Feb 15, 2008. Both 3199.HK and SEMB.L are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a HK$10,000 investment in ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (SEMB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
3199.HK ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF	3.48%	5.50%	3.24%	2.30%	-6.26%	7.36%	10.59%	0.61%	0.60%	6.18%
SEMB.L iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist)	-0.12%	16.43%	6.81%	11.61%	-17.28%	0.04%	5.80%	17.76%	-3.96%	12.02%

Different Trading Currencies

3199.HK is traded in HKD, while SEMB.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the SEMB.L values have been converted to HKD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, 3199.HK achieves a 3.48% return, which is significantly higher than SEMB.L's -0.12% return. Over the past 10 years, 3199.HK has underperformed SEMB.L with an annualized return of 2.52%, while SEMB.L has yielded a comparatively higher 4.95% annualized return.

3199.HK

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 3.48%
• 6M: 5.92%
• 1Y: 9.02%
• 3Y*: 3.84%
• 5Y*: 3.18%
• 10Y*: 2.52%

SEMB.L

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: -2.13%
• YTD: -0.12%
• 6M: 3.41%
• 1Y: 12.37%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: 3.75%
• 10Y*: 4.95%

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

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

3199.HK has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is higher than SEMB.L's 0.45% expense ratio.

3199.HK

ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF

SEMB.L

iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist)

Return for Risk

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

3199.HK

3199.HK Risk / Return Rank: 89
3199.HK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
3199.HK Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
3199.HK Omega Ratio Rank: 85
3199.HK Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
3199.HK Martin Ratio Rank: 88

SEMB.L

SEMB.L Risk / Return Rank: 61
SEMB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
SEMB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
SEMB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 54
SEMB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
SEMB.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.

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (SEMB.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.

	3199.HK	SEMB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	1.71	+0.17
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	2.41	+0.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.32	+0.04
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.00	2.79	+1.20
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.84	11.62	+0.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current 3199.HK Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the SEMB.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of 3199.HK and SEMB.L, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	3199.HK	SEMB.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.88	1.71	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63	0.40	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.49	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.53	0.66	-0.13

Correlation

The correlation between 3199.HK and SEMB.L is 0.07, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Dividend Comparison

3199.HK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.30%, less than SEMB.L's 7.87% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
3199.HK ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF	3.30%	3.34%	3.43%	3.51%	3.65%	3.40%	3.29%	3.57%	3.62%	3.39%	3.56%	3.69%
SEMB.L iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist)	7.87%	7.87%	7.27%	7.21%	6.70%	5.35%	5.28%	6.25%	6.15%	6.48%	6.88%	7.10%

Drawdowns

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum 3199.HK drawdown since its inception was -11.05%, smaller than the maximum SEMB.L drawdown of -31.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for 3199.HK and SEMB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	3199.HK	SEMB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.05%	-21.74%	+10.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.67%	-5.09%	+3.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.05%	-13.70%	+2.65%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-11.05%	-20.43%	+9.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.17%	-1.77%	+1.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.30%	-4.55%	+1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.71%	1.44%	-0.73%

Volatility

3199.HK vs. SEMB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ICBC CSOP FTSE Chinese Government and Policy Bank Bond Index ETF (3199.HK) is 1.69%, while iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond UCITS ETF (Dist) (SEMB.L) has a volatility of 2.71%. This indicates that 3199.HK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SEMB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	3199.HK	SEMB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.69%	2.71%	-1.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.68%	4.27%	-0.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.36%	7.23%	-1.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.72%	9.38%	-3.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.69%	10.02%	-4.33%