CBND.L vs. EMLC.L

Last updated Jul 26, 2026

CBND.L (Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and EMLC.L (VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - CBND.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index, while EMLC.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index-Emerging Markets Global Core Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CBND.L returned 2.82%/yr vs 1.80%/yr for EMLC.L. Their 0.44 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CBND.L charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for EMLC.L.

Performance

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) and VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc) (EMLC.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBND.L achieves a 4.91% return, which is significantly higher than EMLC.L's 0.82% return.

CBND.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.76%
• 6M: 4.30%
• YTD: 4.91%
• 1Y: 7.63%
• 3Y*: 5.75%
• 5Y*: 2.82%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.38%

EMLC.L

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: -0.72%
• 6M: -0.76%
• YTD: 0.82%
• 1Y: 6.27%
• 3Y*: 5.48%
• 5Y*: 1.80%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.55%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CBND.L Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	$11.54K	$6.55K	$2.92K
EMLC.L VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc)	$364.05K	$243.21K	$447.62K

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CBND.L Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	4.91%	5.04%	4.67%	1.28%	-5.17%	7.61%	8.70%	3.08%
EMLC.L VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc)	0.82%	17.98%	-2.29%	10.29%	-9.98%	-9.75%	2.70%	1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between CBND.L and EMLC.L is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2019	0.44

Return for Risk

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBND.L

CBND.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
CBND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
CBND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CBND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CBND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CBND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 94

EMLC.L

EMLC.L Risk / Return Rank: 31
EMLC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
EMLC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
EMLC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 30
EMLC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EMLC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) and VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc) (EMLC.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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	CBND.L	EMLC.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.38	0.81	+1.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.56	1.20	+2.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.15	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.43	0.98	+6.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.36	3.07	+15.29

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBND.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is higher than the EMLC.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBND.L and EMLC.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBND.L drawdown since its inception was -11.48%, smaller than the maximum EMLC.L drawdown of -26.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBND.L and EMLC.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBND.L	EMLC.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.48%	-26.61%	+15.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.99%	-6.06%	+5.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.66%	-8.47%	+4.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.48%	-23.38%	+11.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.17%	-2.63%	+2.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.79%	-9.14%	+6.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.39%	1.93%	-1.54%

Volatility

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) is 0.79%, while VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc) (EMLC.L) has a volatility of 2.00%. This indicates that CBND.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMLC.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBND.L	EMLC.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.79%	2.00%	-1.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.58%	6.31%	-3.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.10%	7.36%	-4.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.00%	8.37%	-3.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.93%	9.22%	-4.29%

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBND.L has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLC.L's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBND.L vs. EMLC.L - Dividend Comparison

CBND.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%, while EMLC.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CBND.L Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	2.04%	2.20%	2.45%	2.54%	2.72%	2.52%	1.87%
EMLC.L VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond UCITS ETF A USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBND.L and EMLC.L in my portfolio?

CBND.L and EMLC.L have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CBND.L or EMLC.L?

On fees, CBND.L is cheaper at 0.24% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBND.L or EMLC.L?

CBND.L is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for EMLC.L.

What is the main difference between CBND.L and EMLC.L?

CBND.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while EMLC.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. CBND.L tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index, while EMLC.L tracks J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index-Emerging Markets Global Core Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for CBND.L and 0.30% for EMLC.L.