EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE
EMA5.DE (L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF) and ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMA5.DE tracks the J.P. Morgan ESG EMBI Global Diversified Short-Term Custom Maturity while ICGB.DE tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMA5.DE returned 3.31%/yr vs 3.70%/yr for ICGB.DE. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMA5.DE charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ICGB.DE.
Performance
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMA5.DE achieves a 3.09% return, which is significantly lower than ICGB.DE's 8.29% return.
EMA5.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.09%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- YTD
- 3.09%
- 1Y
- 6.28%
- 3Y*
- 6.86%
- 5Y*
- 3.31%
- 10Y*
- —
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.24%
- 6M
- 6.21%
- YTD
- 8.29%
- 1Y
- 8.81%
- 3Y*
- 5.26%
- 5Y*
- 3.70%
- 10Y*
- —
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMA5.DE L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF | 3.09% | -2.08% | 14.60% | 4.24% | -4.92% | 8.07% | -0.83% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 8.29% | -7.16% | 11.36% | -2.27% | 1.10% | 17.31% | -0.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMA5.DE and ICGB.DE is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2020 | 0.65 |
The correlation between EMA5.DE and ICGB.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.67 - 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
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE — Risk / Return Rank
EMA5.DE
ICGB.DE
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF (EMA5.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE). 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.
| EMA5.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.31 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.20 | 3.17 | -0.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.73 | 8.39 | -2.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMA5.DE drawdown since its inception was -10.01%, smaller than the maximum ICGB.DE drawdown of -13.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMA5.DE and ICGB.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMA5.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.01% | -13.36% | +3.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.87% | -2.77% | -0.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.01% | -11.17% | +1.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.01% | -13.36% | +3.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.45% | -1.42% | -1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.33% | -6.39% | +3.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.10% | 1.04% | +0.06% |
Volatility
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Volatility Comparison
L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF (EMA5.DE) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) at 1.06%. This indicates that EMA5.DE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICGB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMA5.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.97% | 1.06% | +1.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.43% | 3.58% | +1.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.74% | 5.32% | +1.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.21% | 6.63% | +0.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.05% | 7.89% | -0.84% |
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMA5.DE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ICGB.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMA5.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Dividend Comparison
EMA5.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.44%, more than ICGB.DE's 1.68% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMA5.DE L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF | 2.44% | 6.10% | 5.86% | 4.63% | 3.06% | 1.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.68% | 1.92% | 2.22% | 2.58% | 2.80% | 2.71% | 2.63% | 0.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMA5.DE and ICGB.DE have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMA5.DE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMA5.DE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
EMA5.DE tracks J.P. Morgan ESG EMBI Global Diversified Short-Term Custom Maturity, while ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: Legal & General and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EMA5.DE and 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
Find the right allocation for EMA5.DE and ICGB.DE
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