EBND vs. CBON
EBND (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF) and CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EBND tracks the Bloomberg Emerging Market Local Currency Government Diversified while CBON tracks the ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EBND returned 1.72%/yr vs 2.93%/yr for CBON. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EBND charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CBON.
Performance
EBND vs. CBON - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EBND achieves a -0.23% return, which is significantly lower than CBON's 5.41% return. Over the past 10 years, EBND has underperformed CBON with an annualized return of 1.72%, while CBON has yielded a comparatively higher 2.93% annualized return.
EBND
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- -0.23%
- 6M
- 0.63%
- 1Y
- 5.78%
- 3Y*
- 5.59%
- 5Y*
- 0.03%
- 10Y*
- 1.72%
CBON
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 1.75%
- YTD
- 5.41%
- 6M
- 6.88%
- 1Y
- 9.26%
- 3Y*
- 5.05%
- 5Y*
- 2.03%
- 10Y*
- 2.93%
EBND vs. CBON - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF | -0.23% | 15.83% | -2.70% | 9.02% | -11.84% | -9.66% | 4.49% | 10.40% | -6.52% | 13.93% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 5.41% | 5.46% | 1.85% | 2.92% | -7.99% | 5.93% | 12.01% | 2.67% | 1.88% | 6.96% |
Correlation
The correlation between EBND and CBON is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 12, 2014 | 0.35 |
The correlation between EBND and CBON shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (all time) to 0.49 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
EBND vs. CBON — Risk / Return Rank
EBND
CBON
EBND vs. CBON - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON). 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.
| EBND | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.88 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 1.54 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.88 | 6.94 | -6.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.93 | 25.86 | -22.92 |
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
| EBND | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.84 | 2.70 | -1.86 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 | 0.41 | -0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.19 | 0.53 | -0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.10 | 0.42 | -0.32 |
Drawdowns
EBND vs. CBON - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EBND drawdown since its inception was -29.51%, which is greater than CBON's maximum drawdown of -14.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBND and CBON.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EBND | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.51% | -14.13% | -15.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.63% | -1.34% | -5.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.25% | -4.56% | -4.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.57% | -14.13% | -13.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.50% | -14.13% | -15.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.24% | -0.02% | -3.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.87% | -3.99% | -6.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.98% | 0.36% | +1.62% |
Volatility
EBND vs. CBON - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND) has a higher volatility of 2.35% compared to VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON) at 0.91%. This indicates that EBND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBON based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EBND | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.35% | 0.91% | +1.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.94% | 2.62% | +3.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.92% | 3.45% | +3.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.98% | 4.93% | +4.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.19% | 5.58% | +3.61% |
EBND vs. CBON - Expense Ratio Comparison
EBND has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CBON's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
EBND vs. CBON - Dividend Comparison
EBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.83%, more than CBON's 1.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 1.52% | 1.66% | 2.15% | 3.01% | 2.70% | 3.05% | 2.87% | 3.87% | 3.39% | 3.33% | 3.25% | 2.78% |
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF | 5.83% | 5.54% | 5.89% | 5.26% | 4.75% | 3.83% | 3.67% | 4.68% | 4.70% | 2.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EBND and CBON have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EBND has higher volatility (2.35%) compared to CBON (0.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBND dropped -29.51% vs CBON's -14.13%.
On 10-year performance, CBON leads with 2.93% vs 1.72% for EBND. On fees, EBND is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, CBON has been the lower-risk option at 0.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, CBON has performed better with a 2.93% return vs 1.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EBND is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CBON.
EBND has the higher dividend yield at 5.83%, compared with 1.52% for CBON.
EBND tracks Bloomberg Emerging Market Local Currency Government Diversified, while CBON tracks ChinaBond China High Quality Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EBND and 0.50% for CBON.
CBON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.70 vs 0.84), 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 EBND and CBON
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