CEMB vs. SKOR
CEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF) and SKOR (FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund) are both Corporate Bonds funds - CEMB tracks the JP Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified while SKOR tracks the NorthernTrustUS Corporate Bond Quality Value Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CEMB returned 3.49%/yr vs 2.85%/yr for SKOR. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CEMB charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for SKOR.
Performance
CEMB vs. SKOR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CEMB achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly higher than SKOR's 0.33% return. Over the past 10 years, CEMB has outperformed SKOR with an annualized return of 3.49%, while SKOR has yielded a comparatively lower 2.85% annualized return.
CEMB
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.46%
- YTD
- 1.49%
- 6M
- 1.83%
- 1Y
- 7.31%
- 3Y*
- 7.31%
- 5Y*
- 1.97%
- 10Y*
- 3.49%
SKOR
- 1D
- -0.13%
- 1M
- 0.27%
- YTD
- 0.33%
- 6M
- 0.53%
- 1Y
- 5.29%
- 3Y*
- 5.88%
- 5Y*
- 1.78%
- 10Y*
- 2.85%
CEMB vs. SKOR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF | 1.49% | 8.86% | 5.81% | 8.37% | -12.58% | -0.59% | 6.77% | 13.90% | -2.57% | 7.11% |
SKOR FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund | 0.33% | 7.99% | 4.42% | 7.64% | -9.88% | -1.40% | 8.84% | 10.69% | -1.25% | 4.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMB and SKOR is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2014 | 0.44 |
Over the past year, CEMB and SKOR have become more correlated (0.78) than their long-term average of 0.44, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
CEMB vs. SKOR — Risk / Return Rank
CEMB
SKOR
CEMB vs. SKOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB) and FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund (SKOR). 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.
| CEMB | SKOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.47 | 1.36 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.55 | 2.54 | +0.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.06 | 9.09 | +1.97 |
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
| CEMB | SKOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.40 | 1.95 | +0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 | 0.41 | -0.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 | 0.58 | -0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 0.63 | -0.13 |
Drawdowns
CEMB vs. SKOR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMB drawdown since its inception was -20.84%, which is greater than SKOR's maximum drawdown of -15.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMB and SKOR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CEMB | SKOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.84% | -15.98% | -4.86% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.88% | -2.09% | -0.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.85% | -3.11% | -0.74% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.48% | -15.13% | -5.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -20.84% | -15.98% | -4.86% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.24% | -0.78% | +0.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.66% | -2.65% | -1.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.66% | 0.58% | +0.08% |
Volatility
CEMB vs. SKOR - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB) has a higher volatility of 1.08% compared to FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund (SKOR) at 0.85%. This indicates that CEMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SKOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CEMB | SKOR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.08% | 0.85% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.43% | 1.99% | +0.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.06% | 2.72% | +0.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.63% | 4.42% | +1.21% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.30% | 4.90% | +1.40% |
CEMB vs. SKOR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SKOR's 0.22% expense ratio.
Dividends
CEMB vs. SKOR - Dividend Comparison
CEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%, more than SKOR's 4.67% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF | 5.13% | 5.14% | 5.11% | 4.77% | 4.29% | 3.51% | 3.86% | 4.19% | 4.66% | 4.06% | 4.26% | 4.76% |
SKOR FlexShares Credit-Scored US Corporate Bond Index Fund | 4.67% | 4.70% | 4.90% | 3.90% | 2.57% | 2.55% | 3.38% | 3.53% | 2.85% | 2.46% | 2.74% | 2.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CEMB and SKOR have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CEMB has higher volatility (1.08%) compared to SKOR (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CEMB dropped -20.84% vs SKOR's -15.98%.
On 10-year performance, CEMB leads with 3.49% vs 2.85% for SKOR. On fees, SKOR is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, SKOR has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CEMB has performed better with a 3.49% return vs 2.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SKOR is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CEMB.
CEMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.13%, compared with 4.67% for SKOR.
CEMB tracks JP Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified, while SKOR tracks NorthernTrustUS Corporate Bond Quality Value Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CEMB and 0.22% for SKOR.
CEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 1.95), 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.
Find the right allocation for CEMB and SKOR
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