EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L
EMAU.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and LDGL.L (L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing) are both exchange-traded funds - EMAU.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while LDGL.L is a Global Equity Income fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMAU.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LDGL.L.
Performance
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
EMAU.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.27%
- 6M
- 0.92%
- YTD
- 1.29%
- 1Y
- 5.57%
- 3Y*
- 6.29%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LDGL.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.54%
- 6M
- 11.10%
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 1.01% |
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 12.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMAU.L and LDGL.L is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2026 | 0.52 |
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
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L — Risk / Return Rank
EMAU.L
LDGL.L
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.L) and L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LDGL.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.
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.
| EMAU.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.18 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.66 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMAU.L drawdown since its inception was -19.62%, which is greater than LDGL.L's maximum drawdown of -9.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMAU.L and LDGL.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMAU.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.62% | -9.46% | -10.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.01% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.27% | 0.00% | -0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.68% | -2.37% | -3.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.57% | — | — |
Volatility
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMAU.L | LDGL.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.85% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.81% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.39% | 14.29% | -10.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.58% | 14.29% | -8.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.58% | 14.29% | -8.71% |
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMAU.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than LDGL.L's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMAU.L vs. LDGL.L - Dividend Comparison
EMAU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LDGL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.60%.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% |
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing | 1.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMAU.L and LDGL.L 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.
On fees, LDGL.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LDGL.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EMAU.L.
EMAU.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while LDGL.L is Global Equity Income. EMAU.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while LDGL.L tracks FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EMAU.L and 0.29% for LDGL.L.
Find the right allocation for EMAU.L and LDGL.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