DBLLX vs. IMCDX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

DBLLX (DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund) and IMCDX (Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. Their 0.52 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. DBLLX charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IMCDX.

Performance

DBLLX vs. IMCDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund (DBLLX) and Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund (IMCDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

DBLLX

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -0.31%
• 6M: 0.36%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 1Y: 3.61%
• 3Y*: 6.44%
• 5Y*: 3.36%
• 10Y*: 3.32%
• ALL TIME*: 3.26%

IMCDX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DBLLX DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

DBLLX vs. IMCDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
DBLLX DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund	0.95%	7.86%	7.20%	7.00%	-5.05%	-0.21%	3.53%	8.57%	-0.04%	4.20%
IMCDX Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund	0.00%	0.00%	6.44%	8.51%	-13.79%	0.08%	8.35%	13.65%	-1.77%	9.40%

Correlation

The correlation between DBLLX and IMCDX is 0.52, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.56
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2014	0.52

The correlation between DBLLX and IMCDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.46 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DBLLX vs. IMCDX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DBLLX

DBLLX Risk / Return Rank: 96
DBLLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
DBLLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
DBLLX Omega Ratio Rank: 98
DBLLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
DBLLX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

IMCDX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DBLLX vs. IMCDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund (DBLLX) and Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund (IMCDX). 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.

	DBLLX	IMCDX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.93	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.59	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.83	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.93	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.59	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	DBLLX	IMCDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.35%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.13%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-10.13%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.27%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.21%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DBLLX	IMCDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.53%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.03%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.95%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.91%	—	—

DBLLX vs. IMCDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

DBLLX has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCDX's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

DBLLX vs. IMCDX - Dividend Comparison

DBLLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.65%, while IMCDX has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DBLLX DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund	4.65%	5.27%	4.70%	3.74%	2.41%	2.15%	2.61%	4.93%	2.87%	3.00%	3.19%	3.77%
IMCDX Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund	0.00%	0.00%	4.08%	4.21%	3.80%	6.14%	4.64%	4.99%	5.30%	4.79%	5.22%	5.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DBLLX and IMCDX in my portfolio?

DBLLX and IMCDX have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.