PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMB vs. FEMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMB vs. FEMB - 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 First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB). 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 higher than FEMB's 0.60% return. Over the past 10 years, EMB has outperformed FEMB with an annualized return of 3.29%, while FEMB has yielded a comparatively lower 2.51% 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%

FEMB

1D
-0.81%
1M
0.57%
YTD
0.60%
6M
0.88%
1Y
10.20%
3Y*
7.79%
5Y*
1.63%
10Y*
2.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMB vs. FEMB - 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%
FEMB
First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF
0.60%21.77%-5.61%17.12%-10.50%-13.40%3.16%11.52%-7.19%11.92%

Correlation

The correlation between EMB and FEMB is 0.56, 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

0.56

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

0.56

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

0.56

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

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2014

0.45

The correlation between EMB and FEMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.45 (all time) to 0.56 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. FEMB — 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

FEMB
FEMB Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
FEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
FEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
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. FEMB - 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 First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB). 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.


EMBFEMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.23

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

1.35

+1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.01

4.34

+6.67

EMB vs. FEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is higher than the FEMB Sharpe Ratio of 1.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMB and FEMB, 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


EMBFEMBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.09

1.22

+0.87

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

0.16

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.33

0.23

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.09

+0.35

Drawdowns

EMB vs. FEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, which is greater than FEMB's maximum drawdown of -30.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and FEMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMBFEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.70%

-30.44%

-4.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.51%

-7.58%

+3.07%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.95%

-10.13%

+2.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.74%

-27.85%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.74%

-30.44%

+1.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

-3.91%

+3.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.06%

-9.93%

+4.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.05%

2.35%

-1.30%

Volatility

EMB vs. FEMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) is 1.85%, while First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB) has a volatility of 3.05%. This indicates that EMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMBFEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.85%

3.05%

-1.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.52%

6.57%

-2.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.56%

8.36%

-2.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.75%

10.26%

-0.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.96%

10.99%

-1.03%

EMB vs. FEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FEMB's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMB vs. FEMB - Dividend Comparison

EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.06%, less than FEMB's 6.06% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
FEMB
First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF
6.06%5.67%6.09%5.15%6.35%6.12%5.29%5.40%5.86%6.38%5.83%4.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMB and FEMB have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FEMB has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to EMB (1.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMB dropped -34.70% vs FEMB's -30.44%.

On 10-year performance, EMB leads with 3.29% vs 2.51% for FEMB. On fees, EMB is cheaper at 0.39% 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, EMB has performed better with a 3.29% return vs 2.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMB is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FEMB.

FEMB has the higher dividend yield at 6.06%, compared with 5.06% for EMB.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMB and 0.85% for FEMB.

EMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.22), 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 FEMB

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