EMB vs. BEMB
EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and BEMB (Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds from iShares. EMB is passively managed, while BEMB is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMB returned 9.74%/yr vs 8.80%/yr for BEMB. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. EMB charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for BEMB.
Performance
EMB vs. BEMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMB achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly higher than BEMB's 1.27% return.
EMB
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- 1.80%
- 6M
- 1.93%
- 1Y
- 11.56%
- 3Y*
- 9.74%
- 5Y*
- 1.86%
- 10Y*
- 3.29%
BEMB
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 0.94%
- YTD
- 1.27%
- 6M
- 1.64%
- 1Y
- 9.77%
- 3Y*
- 8.80%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMB vs. BEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 1.80% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 9.47% |
BEMB Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 1.27% | 12.27% | 5.51% | 8.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMB and BEMB is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2023 | 0.97 |
The correlation between EMB and BEMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - 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
EMB vs. BEMB — Risk / Return Rank
EMB
BEMB
EMB vs. BEMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) and Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB). 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.
| EMB | BEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.45 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.58 | 2.68 | -0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.01 | 11.53 | -0.52 |
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
| EMB | BEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09 | 2.30 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.19 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.44 | 1.45 | -1.02 |
Drawdowns
EMB vs. BEMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, which is greater than BEMB's maximum drawdown of -6.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and BEMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMB | BEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.70% | -6.17% | -28.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.51% | -3.67% | -0.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.95% | -6.17% | -1.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.74% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.74% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | -0.34% | -0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.06% | -0.94% | -4.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.05% | 0.85% | +0.20% |
Volatility
EMB vs. BEMB - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) has a higher volatility of 1.85% compared to Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (BEMB) at 1.49%. This indicates that EMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMB | BEMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.85% | 1.49% | +0.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.52% | 3.46% | +1.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.56% | 4.26% | +1.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.75% | 5.88% | +3.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.96% | 5.88% | +4.08% |
EMB vs. BEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than BEMB's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMB vs. BEMB - Dividend Comparison
EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.06%, less than BEMB's 6.88% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BEMB Ishares J.P. Morgan Broad USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 6.88% | 6.88% | 6.31% | 5.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.06% | 4.98% | 5.46% | 4.74% | 5.04% | 3.89% | 3.88% | 4.51% | 5.64% | 4.54% | 4.83% | 4.84% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, EMB and BEMB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
EMB has higher volatility (1.85%) compared to BEMB (1.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMB dropped -34.70% vs BEMB's -6.17%.
On 3-year performance, EMB leads with 9.74% vs 8.80% for BEMB. On fees, BEMB is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BEMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, EMB has performed better with a 9.74% return vs 8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BEMB is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMB.
BEMB has the higher dividend yield at 6.88%, compared with 5.06% for EMB.
Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMB and 0.18% for BEMB.
BEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.09), 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 EMB and BEMB
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