EMB vs. IGF
EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index, while IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMB returned 3.33%/yr vs 8.40%/yr for IGF. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.39% expense ratio.
Performance
EMB vs. IGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMB achieves a 2.68% return, which is significantly lower than IGF's 9.67% return. Over the past 10 years, EMB has underperformed IGF with an annualized return of 3.33%, while IGF has yielded a comparatively higher 8.40% annualized return.
EMB
- 1D
- 0.47%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 2.68%
- 6M
- 2.69%
- 1Y
- 11.68%
- 3Y*
- 9.65%
- 5Y*
- 1.99%
- 10Y*
- 3.33%
IGF
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- -0.16%
- YTD
- 9.67%
- 6M
- 10.73%
- 1Y
- 18.46%
- 3Y*
- 15.62%
- 5Y*
- 10.85%
- 10Y*
- 8.40%
EMB vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 2.68% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 10.62% | -18.63% | -2.23% | 5.42% | 15.48% | -5.47% | 10.28% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 9.67% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | -6.50% | 25.82% | -9.95% | 19.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMB and IGF 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 | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2007 | 0.44 |
The correlation between EMB and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (all time) to 0.55 (3 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. IGF — Risk / Return Rank
EMB
IGF
EMB vs. IGF - 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 Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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 | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.31 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.63 | 3.10 | -0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.23 | 8.83 | +2.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMB vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and IGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMB | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.70% | -58.33% | +23.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.51% | -5.87% | +1.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.95% | -14.28% | +6.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.74% | -20.83% | -7.91% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.74% | -42.11% | +13.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.99% | +2.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.05% | -11.85% | +6.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.06% | 2.06% | -1.00% |
Volatility
EMB vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) is 1.81%, while iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) has a volatility of 3.45%. This indicates that EMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMB | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.81% | 3.45% | -1.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.70% | 8.73% | -4.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.67% | 10.57% | -4.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.75% | 13.97% | -4.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.96% | 16.83% | -6.87% |
EMB vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both EMB and IGF have an expense ratio of 0.39%.
Dividends
EMB vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison
EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.01%, more than IGF's 2.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.01% | 4.98% | 5.46% | 4.74% | 5.04% | 3.89% | 3.88% | 4.51% | 5.64% | 4.54% | 4.83% | 4.84% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.91% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMB and IGF 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.
IGF has higher volatility (3.45%) compared to EMB (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMB dropped -34.70% vs IGF's -58.33%.
On 10-year performance, IGF leads with 8.40% vs 3.33% for EMB. Both ETFs have the same 0.39% expense ratio. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IGF has performed better with a 8.40% return vs 3.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMB and IGF have the same expense ratio: 0.39% per year.
EMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.01%, compared with 2.91% for IGF.
EMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while IGF is Industrials Equities. EMB tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index, while IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net).
EMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.72), 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 IGF
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