CBON vs. EMHC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) and EMHC (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - CBON tracks the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index while EMHC tracks the Bloomberg Emerging USD Bond Core Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CBON returned 2.03%/yr vs 1.55%/yr for EMHC. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBON charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for EMHC.

Performance

CBON vs. EMHC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) and SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBON achieves a 5.41% return, which is significantly higher than EMHC's 1.57% return.

CBON

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.75%
• YTD: 5.41%
• 6M: 6.88%
• 1Y: 9.26%
• 3Y*: 5.05%
• 5Y*: 2.03%
• 10Y*: 2.93%

EMHC

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 11.54%
• 3Y*: 8.74%
• 5Y*: 1.55%
• 10Y*: —

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

CBON vs. EMHC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF	5.41%	5.46%	1.85%	2.92%	-7.99%	6.05%
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.57%	14.07%	3.52%	10.06%	-17.75%	1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between CBON and EMHC is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.31
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2021	0.27

CBON vs. EMHC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CBON	EMHC
Real Estate	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CBON vs. EMHC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBON

CBON Risk / Return Rank: 89
CBON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
CBON Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
CBON Omega Ratio Rank: 87
CBON Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CBON Martin Ratio Rank: 93

EMHC

EMHC Risk / Return Rank: 64
EMHC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
EMHC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
EMHC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EMHC Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EMHC Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

CBON vs. EMHC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) and SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). 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.

	CBON	EMHC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	2.14	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.09	3.24	+0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.41	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.94	2.65	+4.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	25.86	11.09	+14.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CBON vs. EMHC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBON Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the EMHC Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBON and EMHC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CBON	EMHC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.70	2.14	+0.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	0.17	+0.24
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.22	+0.21

Drawdowns

CBON vs. EMHC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBON drawdown since its inception was -14.13%, smaller than the maximum EMHC drawdown of -28.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBON and EMHC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBON	EMHC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.13%	-28.03%	+13.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.34%	-4.37%	+3.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.56%	-7.67%	+3.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.13%	-28.03%	+13.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-14.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-0.32%	+0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.99%	-9.91%	+5.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.36%	1.04%	-0.68%

Volatility

CBON vs. EMHC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) is 0.91%, while SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) has a volatility of 1.89%. This indicates that CBON experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMHC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBON	EMHC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.91%	1.89%	-0.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.62%	4.16%	-1.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.45%	5.43%	-1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.93%	9.06%	-4.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.58%	8.96%	-3.38%

CBON vs. EMHC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBON has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EMHC's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBON vs. EMHC - Dividend Comparison

CBON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than EMHC's 6.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF	1.52%	1.66%	2.15%	3.01%	2.70%	3.05%	2.87%	3.87%	3.39%	3.33%	3.25%	2.78%
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	6.11%	6.16%	5.95%	5.12%	5.11%	2.97%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBON and EMHC in my portfolio?

CBON and EMHC have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CBON or EMHC?

EMHC has higher volatility (1.89%) compared to CBON (0.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBON dropped -14.13% vs EMHC's -28.03%.

Which ETF is better, CBON or EMHC?

On 5-year performance, CBON leads with 2.03% vs 1.55% for EMHC. On fees, EMHC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, CBON has been the lower-risk option at 0.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBON or EMHC?

Over the 5-year period, CBON has performed better with a 2.03% return vs 1.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBON or EMHC?

EMHC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CBON.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CBON or EMHC?

EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.11%, compared with 1.52% for CBON.

What is the main difference between CBON and EMHC?

CBON tracks ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index, while EMHC tracks Bloomberg Emerging USD Bond Core Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CBON and 0.23% for EMHC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CBON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 2.14), 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.