EMB vs. BND
EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and BND (Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index, while BND is a Total Bond Market fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Float Adjusted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMB returned 2.84%/yr vs 1.36%/yr for BND. Their 0.40 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EMB charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for BND.
Performance
EMB vs. BND - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMB achieves a 0.90% return, which is significantly higher than BND's -0.54% return. Over the past 10 years, EMB has outperformed BND with an annualized return of 2.84%, while BND has yielded a comparatively lower 1.36% annualized return.
EMB
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- -1.60%
- 6M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- 0.90%
- 1Y
- 6.95%
- 3Y*
- 8.45%
- 5Y*
- 1.48%
- 10Y*
- 2.84%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.60%
BND
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- -1.20%
- 6M
- -0.75%
- YTD
- -0.54%
- 1Y
- 1.75%
- 3Y*
- 3.92%
- 5Y*
- -0.42%
- 10Y*
- 1.36%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.99%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $451.00M | $507.49M | $592.68M | |
| $536.38M | $549.68M | $593.36M |
EMB vs. BND - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 0.90% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 10.62% | -18.63% | -2.23% | 5.42% | 15.48% | -5.47% | 10.28% |
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF | -0.54% | 7.08% | 1.38% | 5.65% | -13.11% | -1.86% | 7.71% | 8.84% | -0.12% | 3.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMB and BND is 0.78, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.80 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.74 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2007 | 0.40 |
Over the past year, EMB and BND have become more correlated (0.78) than their long-term average of 0.40, 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
EMB vs. BND — Risk / Return Rank
EMB
BND
EMB vs. BND - 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 Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND). 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.
| EMB | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.57 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.12 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.62 | 0.99 | +0.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.59 | 2.48 | +4.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMB vs. BND - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, which is greater than BND's maximum drawdown of -18.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and BND.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMB | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.70% | -18.58% | -16.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.51% | -2.68% | -1.83% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.91% | -4.81% | -2.10% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.74% | -17.91% | -10.83% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.74% | -18.58% | -10.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.82% | -3.15% | +1.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.02% | -3.06% | -1.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.10% | 1.07% | +0.03% |
Volatility
EMB vs. BND - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) has a higher volatility of 1.40% compared to Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) at 0.98%. This indicates that EMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMB | BND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.40% | 0.98% | +0.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.77% | 2.90% | +1.87% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.67% | 3.70% | +1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.77% | 6.03% | +3.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.95% | 5.53% | +4.42% |
EMB vs. BND - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than BND's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMB vs. BND - Dividend Comparison
EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.14%, more than BND's 4.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF | 3.69% | 3.86% | 3.67% | 3.09% | 2.60% | 2.12% | 2.38% | 2.72% | 2.81% | 2.54% | 2.51% | 2.57% |
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 4.71% | 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
EMB and BND have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMB has higher volatility (1.40%) compared to BND (0.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMB dropped -34.70% vs BND's -18.58%.
On 10-year performance, EMB leads with 2.84% vs 1.36% for BND. On fees, BND is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BND has been the lower-risk option at 0.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EMB has performed better with a 2.84% return vs 1.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BND is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMB.
EMB has the higher dividend yield at 4.71%, compared with 3.69% for BND.
EMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while BND is Total Bond Market. EMB tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index, while BND tracks Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Float Adjusted Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMB and 0.03% for BND.
EMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 0.72), 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 BND
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