BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE
BBLL.DE (JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond 0-1 yr UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and CEMF.DE (iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc) are both Government Bonds funds - BBLL.DE tracks the ICE US Treasury 0-1 Year Index while CEMF.DE tracks the ICE US Treasury 7-10 Year (EUR Hedged) Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.42, they often move in opposite directions. BBLL.DE charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CEMF.DE.
Performance
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BBLL.DE achieves a 2.66% return, which is significantly higher than CEMF.DE's -1.42% return.
BBLL.DE
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 1.01%
- YTD
- 2.66%
- 6M
- 2.06%
- 1Y
- 2.10%
- 3Y*
- 1.85%
- 5Y*
- 4.31%
- 10Y*
- —
CEMF.DE
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- -1.42%
- 6M
- -1.51%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BBLL.DE JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond 0-1 yr UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 2.66% | -0.14% |
CEMF.DE iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc | -1.42% | 2.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between BBLL.DE and CEMF.DE is -0.42, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2025 | -0.42 |
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
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE — Risk / Return Rank
BBLL.DE
CEMF.DE
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond 0-1 yr UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (BBLL.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 7-10yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged Acc (CEMF.DE). 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.
| BBLL.DE | CEMF.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.62 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.30 | — | — |
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
| BBLL.DE | CEMF.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.29 | +0.01 |
Drawdowns
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BBLL.DE drawdown since its inception was -13.03%, which is greater than CEMF.DE's maximum drawdown of -4.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBLL.DE and CEMF.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BBLL.DE | CEMF.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.03% | -4.45% | -8.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.38% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.65% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.65% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.22% | -2.97% | -4.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.14% | -1.20% | -4.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.61% | — | — |
Volatility
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BBLL.DE | CEMF.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.28% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.12% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.07% | 4.62% | +1.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.46% | 4.62% | +2.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.22% | 4.62% | +2.60% |
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
BBLL.DE has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than CEMF.DE's 0.10% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BBLL.DE vs. CEMF.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither BBLL.DE nor CEMF.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BBLL.DE and CEMF.DE have a correlation of -0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BBLL.DE is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BBLL.DE is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for CEMF.DE.
BBLL.DE tracks ICE US Treasury 0-1 Year Index, while CEMF.DE tracks ICE US Treasury 7-10 Year (EUR Hedged) Index. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for BBLL.DE and 0.10% for CEMF.DE.
Find the right allocation for BBLL.DE and CEMF.DE
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