CESG.L vs. EMUS.L

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

CESG.L (First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc) and EMUS.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - CESG.L is a ESG fund actively managed by First Trust, while EMUS.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 EMUS.L is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, CESG.L returned 5.53%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for EMUS.L. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CESG.L charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EMUS.L.

Performance

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in 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 (Dist) (EMUS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CESG.L achieves a 3.98% return, which is significantly higher than EMUS.L's -1.60% return.

CESG.L

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 3.53%
• 6M: 4.17%
• YTD: 3.98%
• 1Y: 6.69%
• 3Y*: 9.84%
• 5Y*: 5.53%
• 10Y*: —

EMUS.L

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: -0.36%
• 6M: 0.90%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 1Y: 2.31%
• 3Y*: 5.28%
• 5Y*: 1.05%
• 10Y*: —

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

CESG.L vs. EMUS.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	3.98%	11.47%	9.71%	12.32%	-13.97%	23.33%
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-1.60%	8.01%	5.52%	7.02%	-11.63%	1.16%

Correlation

The correlation between CESG.L and EMUS.L 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	0.30
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 9, 2021	0.32

Return for Risk

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CESG.L

CESG.L Risk / Return Rank: 23
CESG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
CESG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
CESG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 23
CESG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
CESG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 22

EMUS.L

EMUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 19
EMUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
EMUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
EMUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 22
EMUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
EMUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

CESG.L vs. EMUS.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 (Dist) (EMUS.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	EMUS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.67	0.51	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.01	0.71	+0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.12	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.76	0.50	+0.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.95	1.32	+0.63

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CESG.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.67, which is higher than the EMUS.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CESG.L and EMUS.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

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CESG.L drawdown since its inception was -22.69%, which is greater than EMUS.L's maximum drawdown of -19.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CESG.L and EMUS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	CESG.L	EMUS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.69%	-19.58%	-3.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.81%	-4.59%	-4.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.31%	-4.59%	-5.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.69%	-19.58%	-3.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	-1.93%	+1.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.51%	-5.63%	+0.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.42%	1.74%	+1.68%

Volatility

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc (CESG.L) has a higher volatility of 3.47% compared to L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) at 0.89%. This indicates that CESG.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMUS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CESG.L	EMUS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.47%	0.89%	+2.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.09%	3.46%	+4.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.01%	4.56%	+5.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.63%	5.30%	+7.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.53%	5.29%	+7.24%

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CESG.L has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than EMUS.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CESG.L vs. EMUS.L - Dividend Comparison

CESG.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EMUS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.79%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CESG.L First Trust Global Capital Strength ESG Leaders UCITS ETF Class A USD Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	2.79%	5.39%	4.96%	4.62%	3.79%	1.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CESG.L and EMUS.L in my portfolio?

CESG.L and EMUS.L 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 ETF is better, CESG.L or EMUS.L?

On fees, EMUS.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CESG.L or EMUS.L?

EMUS.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CESG.L.

What is the main difference between CESG.L and EMUS.L?

CESG.L is categorized as ESG, while EMUS.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 EMUS.L.