EBND vs. LEMB
EBND (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF) and LEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EBND tracks the Bloomberg Emerging Market Local Currency Government Diversified while LEMB tracks the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EBND returned 1.65%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for LEMB. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.30% expense ratio.
Performance
EBND vs. LEMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EBND achieves a -0.09% return, which is significantly lower than LEMB's 1.47% return. Over the past 10 years, EBND has outperformed LEMB with an annualized return of 1.65%, while LEMB has yielded a comparatively lower 1.35% annualized return.
EBND
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- -0.09%
- 6M
- 0.99%
- 1Y
- 5.43%
- 3Y*
- 5.57%
- 5Y*
- 0.06%
- 10Y*
- 1.65%
LEMB
- 1D
- 0.27%
- 1M
- 1.15%
- YTD
- 1.47%
- 6M
- 2.61%
- 1Y
- 9.55%
- 3Y*
- 6.01%
- 5Y*
- 0.64%
- 10Y*
- 1.35%
EBND vs. LEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF | -0.09% | 15.83% | -2.70% | 9.02% | -11.84% | -9.66% | 4.49% | 10.40% | -6.52% | 13.93% |
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 1.47% | 18.02% | -1.72% | 7.23% | -10.74% | -9.92% | 3.10% | 6.40% | -7.49% | 12.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between EBND and LEMB is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2011 | 0.81 |
The correlation between EBND and LEMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. LEMB — Risk / Return Rank
EBND
LEMB
EBND vs. LEMB - 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 iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB). 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 | LEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.28 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.82 | 1.60 | -0.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.74 | 5.43 | -2.69 |
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 | LEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.79 | 1.47 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 | 0.08 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.18 | 0.15 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.10 | 0.05 | +0.06 |
Drawdowns
EBND vs. LEMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EBND drawdown since its inception was -29.51%, roughly equal to the maximum LEMB drawdown of -30.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBND and LEMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EBND | LEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.51% | -30.82% | +1.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.63% | -6.00% | -0.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.25% | -10.09% | +0.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.57% | -25.29% | -2.28% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.50% | -29.09% | -0.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.10% | -4.61% | +1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.86% | -12.74% | +1.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | 1.76% | +0.23% |
Volatility
EBND vs. LEMB - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND) has a higher volatility of 2.30% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) at 2.10%. This indicates that EBND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EBND | LEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.30% | 2.10% | +0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.94% | 5.35% | +0.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.91% | 6.53% | +0.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.97% | 8.23% | +0.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.19% | 9.29% | -0.10% |
EBND vs. LEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both EBND and LEMB have an expense ratio of 0.30%.
Dividends
EBND vs. LEMB - Dividend Comparison
EBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.82%, more than LEMB's 2.41% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF | 5.82% | 5.54% | 5.89% | 5.26% | 4.75% | 3.83% | 3.67% | 4.68% | 4.70% | 2.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 2.41% | 2.44% | 0.00% | 1.34% | 0.86% | 3.89% | 0.00% | 4.39% | 3.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EBND and LEMB have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EBND has higher volatility (2.30%) compared to LEMB (2.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBND dropped -29.51% vs LEMB's -30.82%.
On 10-year performance, EBND leads with 1.65% vs 1.35% for LEMB. Both ETFs have the same 0.30% expense ratio. On volatility, LEMB has been the lower-risk option at 2.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EBND has performed better with a 1.65% return vs 1.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EBND and LEMB have the same expense ratio: 0.30% per year.
EBND has the higher dividend yield at 5.82%, compared with 2.41% for LEMB.
EBND tracks Bloomberg Emerging Market Local Currency Government Diversified, while LEMB tracks J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares.
LEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.47 vs 0.79), 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 LEMB
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