CBON vs. LEMB

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB).

CBON and LEMB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CBON is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. It was launched on Nov 10, 2014. LEMB is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor. It was launched on Oct 18, 2011. Both CBON and LEMB 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

CBON vs. LEMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

CBON vs. LEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF	2.36%	5.46%	1.85%	2.92%	-7.99%	5.93%	12.01%	2.67%	1.88%	6.96%
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF	-1.85%	18.02%	-1.72%	7.23%	-10.74%	-9.92%	3.10%	6.40%	-7.49%	12.49%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBON achieves a 2.36% return, which is significantly higher than LEMB's -1.85% return. Over the past 10 years, CBON has outperformed LEMB with an annualized return of 2.45%, while LEMB has yielded a comparatively lower 1.00% annualized return.

CBON

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -0.14%
• YTD: 2.36%
• 6M: 5.04%
• 1Y: 7.55%
• 3Y*: 3.53%
• 5Y*: 2.16%
• 10Y*: 2.45%

LEMB

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: -5.03%
• YTD: -1.85%
• 6M: 1.44%
• 1Y: 11.60%
• 3Y*: 5.53%
• 5Y*: 0.81%
• 10Y*: 1.00%

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

CBON vs. LEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBON has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LEMB's 0.30% expense ratio.

CBON

VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF

LEMB

iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF

Return for Risk

CBON vs. LEMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBON

CBON Risk / Return Rank: 93
CBON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
CBON Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
CBON Omega Ratio Rank: 90
CBON Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CBON Martin Ratio Rank: 97

LEMB

LEMB Risk / Return Rank: 83
LEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
LEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
LEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 84
LEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
LEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. LEMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB). 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	LEMB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	1.70	+0.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.29	+0.51
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.33	+0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.52	1.99	+2.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.27	8.51	+10.77
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. LEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBON Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is comparable to the LEMB Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBON and LEMB, 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

	CBON	LEMB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.93	1.70	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.10	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.44	0.11	+0.33
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.02	+0.36

Correlation

The correlation between CBON and LEMB is 0.33, 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

CBON vs. LEMB - Dividend Comparison

CBON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.62%, less than LEMB's 2.49% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF	1.62%	1.66%	2.15%	3.01%	2.70%	3.05%	2.87%	3.87%	3.39%	3.33%	3.25%	2.78%
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF	2.49%	2.44%	0.00%	1.34%	0.86%	3.89%	0.00%	4.39%	3.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.64%

Drawdowns

CBON vs. LEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBON drawdown since its inception was -14.13%, smaller than the maximum LEMB drawdown of -30.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBON and LEMB.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBON	LEMB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.13%	-30.82%	+16.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.66%	-6.00%	+4.34%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.13%	-25.29%	+11.16%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-14.13%	-29.09%	+14.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-7.73%	+7.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.05%	-12.83%	+8.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.39%	1.40%	-1.01%

Volatility

CBON vs. LEMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) is 1.49%, while iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) has a volatility of 3.56%. This indicates that CBON experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBON	LEMB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.49%	3.56%	-2.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.51%	4.71%	-2.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.92%	6.85%	-2.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.96%	8.19%	-3.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.60%	9.33%	-3.73%