PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BEMB vs. EMHY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BEMB vs. EMHY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM High Yield Bond ETF (EMHY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BEMB achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly lower than EMHY's 2.80% return.


BEMB

1D
-0.34%
1M
0.94%
YTD
1.27%
6M
1.64%
1Y
9.77%
3Y*
8.80%
5Y*
10Y*

EMHY

1D
-0.37%
1M
1.38%
YTD
2.80%
6M
3.49%
1Y
12.96%
3Y*
13.15%
5Y*
4.25%
10Y*
4.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BEMB vs. EMHY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BEMB
Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
1.27%12.27%5.51%8.88%
EMHY
iShares J.P. Morgan EM High Yield Bond ETF
2.80%13.70%11.97%10.08%

Correlation

The correlation between BEMB and EMHY is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2023

0.88

The correlation between BEMB and EMHY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

BEMB vs. EMHY — Risk / Return Rank

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

BEMB
BEMB Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
BEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
BEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

EMHY
EMHY Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
EMHY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMHY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMHY Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
EMHY Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMHY Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BEMB vs. EMHY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM High Yield Bond ETF (EMHY). 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.


BEMBEMHYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

0.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.47

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

3.00

-0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.53

13.63

-2.09

BEMB vs. EMHY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BEMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the EMHY Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BEMB and EMHY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BEMBEMHYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.30

2.30

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.45

0.50

+0.95

Drawdowns

BEMB vs. EMHY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BEMB drawdown since its inception was -6.17%, smaller than the maximum EMHY drawdown of -30.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BEMB and EMHY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BEMBEMHYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.17%

-30.11%

+23.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.67%

-4.34%

+0.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.17%

-5.95%

-0.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.34%

-0.37%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.94%

-4.90%

+3.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.85%

0.95%

-0.10%

Volatility

BEMB vs. EMHY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB) is 1.49%, while iShares J.P. Morgan EM High Yield Bond ETF (EMHY) has a volatility of 1.66%. This indicates that BEMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMHY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BEMBEMHYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.49%

1.66%

-0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.46%

4.31%

-0.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.26%

5.65%

-1.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.88%

9.10%

-3.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.88%

10.66%

-4.78%

BEMB vs. EMHY - Expense Ratio Comparison

BEMB has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than EMHY's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

BEMB vs. EMHY - Dividend Comparison

BEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.88%, more than EMHY's 6.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BEMB
Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
6.88%6.88%6.31%5.46%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
EMHY
iShares J.P. Morgan EM High Yield Bond ETF
6.41%6.52%6.86%6.73%7.08%5.58%5.44%5.72%6.79%5.59%6.43%6.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


BEMB and EMHY have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMHY has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to BEMB (1.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BEMB dropped -6.17% vs EMHY's -30.11%.

On 3-year performance, EMHY leads with 13.15% vs 8.80% for BEMB. On fees, BEMB is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BEMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, EMHY has performed better with a 13.15% return vs 8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BEMB is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EMHY.

BEMB has the higher dividend yield at 6.88%, compared with 6.41% for EMHY.

Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BEMB and 0.50% for EMHY.

EMHY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.30), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BEMB and EMHY

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