PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EMB vs. DGRO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EMB vs. DGRO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and DGRO (iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPMorgan EMBI Global Core Index, while DGRO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Dividend Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMB returned 3.29%/yr vs 13.30%/yr for DGRO. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMB charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for DGRO.

Performance

EMB vs. DGRO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMB achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly lower than DGRO's 8.76% return. Over the past 10 years, EMB has underperformed DGRO with an annualized return of 3.29%, while DGRO has yielded a comparatively higher 13.30% annualized 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%

DGRO

1D
-0.28%
1M
3.14%
YTD
8.76%
6M
8.75%
1Y
22.54%
3Y*
16.99%
5Y*
10.54%
10Y*
13.30%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMB vs. DGRO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMB
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF		1.80%13.85%5.54%10.62%-18.63%-2.23%5.42%15.48%-5.47%10.28%
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF		8.76%15.69%16.62%10.47%-7.91%26.64%9.50%29.87%-2.38%23.00%

Correlation

The correlation between EMB and DGRO is 0.50, 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

0.50

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.49

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.49

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2014

0.44

The correlation between EMB and DGRO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.50 - 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.

iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF

Often compared with EMB:
EMB vs. VWOBEMB vs. EMLCEMB vs. LEMBEMB vs. PCYEMB vs. EMHYEMB vs. EMBE.LEMB vs. BND
Often compared with DGRO:
DGRO vs. SCHDDGRO vs. VIGDGRO vs. VYMDGRO vs. VOODGRO vs. DGRWDGRO vs. DIVODGRO vs. HDV

Return for Risk

EMB vs. DGRO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EMB
EMB Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
EMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMB Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
EMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
DGRO
DGRO Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
DGRO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGRO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGRO Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
DGRO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGRO Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

EMB vs. DGRO - 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 Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO). 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.

EMBDGRODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.09
2.39

-0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.05
3.49

-0.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.43

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

3.50

-0.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.01

13.52

-2.51

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMB vs. DGRO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the DGRO Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMB and DGRO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

EMBDGRODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.09

2.39

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

0.77

-0.58

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.33

0.80

-0.47

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.76

-0.33

Drawdowns

EMB vs. DGRO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, roughly equal to the maximum DGRO drawdown of -35.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and DGRO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EMBDGRODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.70%

-35.10%

+0.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.51%

-6.47%

+1.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.95%

-14.03%

+6.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.74%

-19.31%

-9.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.74%

-35.10%

+6.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

-0.28%

-0.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.06%

-3.44%

-1.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.05%

1.67%

-0.62%

Volatility

EMB vs. DGRO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) is 1.85%, while iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO) has a volatility of 2.21%. This indicates that EMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DGRO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EMBDGRODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.85%

2.21%

-0.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.52%

6.91%

-2.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.56%

9.48%

-3.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.75%

13.82%

-4.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.96%

16.62%

-6.66%

EMB vs. DGRO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than DGRO's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMB vs. DGRO - Dividend Comparison

EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.06%, more than DGRO's 1.96% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF		1.96%2.09%2.26%2.45%2.34%1.93%2.30%2.21%2.44%2.03%2.27%2.52%
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

EMB and DGRO have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DGRO has higher volatility (2.21%) compared to EMB (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMB dropped -34.70% vs DGRO's -35.10%.

On 10-year performance, DGRO leads with 13.30% vs 3.29% for EMB. On fees, DGRO is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DGRO has performed better with a 13.30% return vs 3.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGRO is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMB.

EMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.06%, compared with 1.96% for DGRO.

EMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while DGRO is Large Cap Growth Equities. EMB tracks JPMorgan EMBI Global Core Index, while DGRO tracks Morningstar US Dividend Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMB and 0.08% for DGRO.

DGRO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMB and DGRO

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