CESG.L vs. EMAU.L
CESG.L (First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc) and EMAU.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - CESG.L is a ESG fund actively managed by First Trust, while EMAU.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. CESG.L is actively managed, while EMAU.L is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CESG.L returned 9.53%/yr vs 6.29%/yr for EMAU.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CESG.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EMAU.L.
Performance
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CESG.L achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly higher than EMAU.L's 1.29% return.
CESG.L
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- 2.28%
- 6M
- 2.77%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 1Y
- 5.82%
- 3Y*
- 9.53%
- 5Y*
- 5.33%
- 10Y*
- —
EMAU.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.27%
- 6M
- 0.92%
- YTD
- 1.29%
- 1Y
- 5.57%
- 3Y*
- 6.29%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CESG.L First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc | 2.70% | 11.47% | 9.71% | 12.32% | -13.97% | 5.90% |
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 1.29% | 8.06% | 5.68% | 6.84% | -11.34% | -1.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between CESG.L and EMAU.L is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2021 | 0.36 |
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
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank
CESG.L
EMAU.L
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) and L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.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.
| CESG.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.75 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.31 | -0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.55 | 2.18 | -1.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.42 | 9.66 | -8.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CESG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.69%, which is greater than EMAU.L's maximum drawdown of -19.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CESG.L and EMAU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CESG.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.69% | -19.62% | -3.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.81% | -2.55% | -6.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.31% | -3.01% | -7.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.69% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.54% | -0.27% | -1.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.52% | -5.68% | +0.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.41% | 0.57% | +2.84% |
Volatility
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Volatility Comparison
First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) has a higher volatility of 3.44% compared to L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.L) at 0.85%. This indicates that CESG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CESG.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.44% | 0.85% | +2.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.01% | 2.81% | +5.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.97% | 3.39% | +6.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.62% | 5.58% | +7.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.53% | 5.58% | +6.95% |
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CESG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EMAU.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CESG.L vs. EMAU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither CESG.L nor EMAU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CESG.L and EMAU.L have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMAU.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMAU.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CESG.L.
CESG.L is categorized as ESG, while EMAU.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CESG.L and 0.35% for EMAU.L.
Find the right allocation for CESG.L and EMAU.L
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