EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L
EIMI.L (iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF) and AGGU.L (iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EIMI.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index, while AGGU.L is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EIMI.L returned 6.83%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for AGGU.L. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EIMI.L charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for AGGU.L.
Performance
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EIMI.L achieves a 18.77% return, which is significantly higher than AGGU.L's 0.17% return.
EIMI.L
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- -3.25%
- YTD
- 18.77%
- 6M
- 21.30%
- 1Y
- 41.81%
- 3Y*
- 20.71%
- 5Y*
- 6.83%
- 10Y*
- 10.00%
AGGU.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.17%
- YTD
- 0.17%
- 6M
- 0.69%
- 1Y
- 3.37%
- 3Y*
- 4.16%
- 5Y*
- 0.48%
- 10Y*
- —
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EIMI.L iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF | 18.77% | 32.16% | 7.36% | 11.03% | -19.67% | -0.65% | 18.80% | 16.37% | -14.18% | 0.77% |
AGGU.L iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF | 0.17% | 4.68% | 3.54% | 6.65% | -11.53% | -1.81% | 5.15% | 8.16% | 1.56% | 0.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between EIMI.L and AGGU.L is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2017 | 0.02 |
Over the past year, EIMI.L and AGGU.L have become more correlated (0.36) than their long-term average of 0.02, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L — Risk / Return Rank
EIMI.L
AGGU.L
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) and iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (AGGU.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.
| EIMI.L | AGGU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.19 | +0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.29 | 1.52 | +1.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.69 | 4.68 | +7.01 |
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
| EIMI.L | AGGU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 1.03 | +1.09 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 | 0.10 | +0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.34 | 0.40 | -0.06 |
Drawdowns
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EIMI.L drawdown since its inception was -38.73%, which is greater than AGGU.L's maximum drawdown of -15.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EIMI.L and AGGU.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EIMI.L | AGGU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.73% | -15.55% | -23.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.66% | -2.21% | -10.45% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.44% | -3.47% | -13.97% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.45% | -15.20% | -20.25% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -38.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.93% | -1.19% | -5.74% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.01% | -3.89% | -10.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.57% | 0.72% | +2.85% |
Volatility
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (EIMI.L) has a higher volatility of 8.95% compared to iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF (AGGU.L) at 1.26%. This indicates that EIMI.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGGU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EIMI.L | AGGU.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.95% | 1.26% | +7.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.30% | 2.73% | +14.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.71% | 3.27% | +16.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.40% | 4.85% | +13.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.19% | 4.48% | +14.71% |
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EIMI.L has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than AGGU.L's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
EIMI.L vs. AGGU.L - Dividend Comparison
Neither EIMI.L nor AGGU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
EIMI.L and AGGU.L have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AGGU.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AGGU.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for EIMI.L.
EIMI.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while AGGU.L is Global Bonds. EIMI.L tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index, while AGGU.L tracks Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for EIMI.L and 0.10% for AGGU.L.
Find the right allocation for EIMI.L and AGGU.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