CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L
CYGB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) and EMAU.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - CYGB.L tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index while EMAU.L tracks the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CYGB.L returned 6.74%/yr vs 5.13%/yr for EMAU.L. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. CYGB.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EMAU.L.
Performance
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
CYGB.L is traded in GBP, while EMAU.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EMAU.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CYGB.L achieves a 3.55% return, which is significantly higher than EMAU.L's 0.88% return.
CYGB.L
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- 6M
- 3.19%
- YTD
- 3.55%
- 1Y
- 3.60%
- 3Y*
- 6.74%
- 5Y*
- 5.44%
- 10Y*
- —
EMAU.L
- 1D
- -1.04%
- 1M
- -1.15%
- 6M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 0.88%
- 1Y
- 4.45%
- 3Y*
- 5.13%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 3.55% | 2.20% | 11.38% | 7.14% | 2.11% | 0.68% |
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.88% | 0.36% | 7.52% | 1.50% | -0.80% | 0.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between CYGB.L and EMAU.L is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2021 | -0.01 |
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
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank
CYGB.L
EMAU.L
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.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.
| CYGB.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.12 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.18 | 0.91 | +4.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.91 | 2.39 | +9.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CYGB.L drawdown since its inception was -1.56%, smaller than the maximum EMAU.L drawdown of -12.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CYGB.L and EMAU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CYGB.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.56% | -12.44% | +10.88% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.69% | -4.84% | +4.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.56% | -8.77% | +7.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -1.56% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.84% | +2.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.24% | -4.47% | +4.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.30% | 1.86% | -1.56% |
Volatility
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.L) is 0.59%, while L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.L) has a volatility of 2.21%. This indicates that CYGB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CYGB.L | EMAU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.59% | 2.21% | -1.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.22% | 5.38% | -3.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.71% | 6.67% | -3.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.37% | 8.44% | -6.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.33% | 8.44% | -6.11% |
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
CYGB.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than EMAU.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
CYGB.L vs. EMAU.L - Dividend Comparison
CYGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, while EMAU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 1.70% | 1.84% | 2.13% | 2.38% | 2.68% | 2.21% |
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CYGB.L and EMAU.L have a correlation of -0.04, 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 0.40% for CYGB.L.
CYGB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while EMAU.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CYGB.L and 0.35% for EMAU.L.
Find the right allocation for CYGB.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