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

Performance

EMB vs. WQDV.L - 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 MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDV.L). 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 2.68% return, which is significantly lower than WQDV.L's 13.76% 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%

WQDV.L

1D
0.00%
1M
1.40%
YTD
13.76%
6M
14.45%
1Y
31.16%
3Y*
18.65%
5Y*
12.29%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%3.19%
WQDV.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
13.76%24.16%9.75%17.23%-6.95%16.00%-0.07%22.73%-7.80%8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between EMB and WQDV.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

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

0.35

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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2017

0.33

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. WQDV.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

EMB
EMB Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
EMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMB Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
EMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

WQDV.L
WQDV.L Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
WQDV.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WQDV.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
WQDV.L Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
WQDV.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
WQDV.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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. WQDV.L - 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 MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDV.L). 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.


EMBWQDV.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.47

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

4.05

-1.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.23

14.99

-3.76

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMB Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the WQDV.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMB and WQDV.L, 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...

Drawdowns

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMB drawdown since its inception was -34.70%, roughly equal to the maximum WQDV.L drawdown of -33.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMB and WQDV.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMBWQDV.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.70%

-33.16%

-1.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.51%

-7.79%

+3.28%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.95%

-14.03%

+6.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.74%

-21.24%

-7.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.05%

+1.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.05%

-4.27%

-0.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.06%

2.11%

-1.05%

Volatility

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) is 1.81%, while iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (WQDV.L) has a volatility of 3.61%. This indicates that EMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WQDV.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMBWQDV.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.81%

3.61%

-1.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.70%

9.39%

-4.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.67%

12.08%

-6.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.75%

13.90%

-4.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.96%

14.66%

-4.70%

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMB has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than WQDV.L's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMB vs. WQDV.L - Dividend Comparison

EMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.01%, more than WQDV.L's 1.81% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
WQDV.L
iShares MSCI World Quality Dividend ESG UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.81%2.31%2.58%2.78%2.95%2.75%2.81%3.01%3.28%0.77%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMB and WQDV.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, WQDV.L is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

WQDV.L is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMB.

EMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while WQDV.L is Global Equities. EMB tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index, while WQDV.L tracks MSCI World High Dividend Yield ESG Reduced Carbon Target Select Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMB and 0.38% for WQDV.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMB and WQDV.L

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