EMBD vs. DCMT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EMBD (Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMBD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by Global X, while DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EMBD returned 8.82% vs 29.43% for DCMT. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. EMBD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for DCMT.

Performance

EMBD vs. DCMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMBD achieves a 1.79% return, which is significantly lower than DCMT's 26.32% return.

EMBD

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: -0.59%
• 6M: 2.01%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 1Y: 8.82%
• 3Y*: 8.76%
• 5Y*: 2.90%
• 10Y*: —

DCMT

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 2.50%
• 6M: 21.40%
• YTD: 26.32%
• 1Y: 29.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMBD vs. DCMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	1.79%	12.55%	8.26%
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	26.32%	6.04%	3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between EMBD and DCMT is -0.31, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	-0.10

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between EMBD and DCMT has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.10 to -0.31, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Return for Risk

EMBD vs. DCMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMBD

EMBD Risk / Return Rank: 55
EMBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
EMBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
EMBD Omega Ratio Rank: 53
EMBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
EMBD Martin Ratio Rank: 59

DCMT

DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 52
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 54
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

EMBD vs. DCMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). 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.

	EMBD	DCMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	1.58	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	2.18	+0.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.27	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.09	1.85	+0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.20	6.54	+1.65

EMBD vs. DCMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBD Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is comparable to the DCMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBD and DCMT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMBD vs. DCMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBD drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, which is greater than DCMT's maximum drawdown of -15.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBD and DCMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMBD	DCMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.27%	-15.96%	-8.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.23%	-15.96%	+11.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.59%	-9.33%	+8.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.77%	-3.54%	-2.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.08%	4.51%	-3.43%

Volatility

EMBD vs. DCMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) is 1.16%, while DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a volatility of 5.79%. This indicates that EMBD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DCMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMBD	DCMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.16%	5.79%	-4.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.19%	16.87%	-12.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.95%	18.76%	-12.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.18%	16.01%	-6.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.83%	16.01%	-7.18%

EMBD vs. DCMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than DCMT's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMBD vs. DCMT - Dividend Comparison

EMBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.69%, more than DCMT's 2.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	2.91%	3.67%	1.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	5.69%	5.48%	5.83%	5.29%	4.53%	4.99%	3.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMBD and DCMT in my portfolio?

EMBD and DCMT have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMBD or DCMT?

DCMT has higher volatility (5.79%) compared to EMBD (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBD dropped -24.27% vs DCMT's -15.96%.

Which ETF is better, EMBD or DCMT?

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 29.43% vs 8.82% for EMBD. On fees, EMBD is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMBD has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMBD or DCMT?

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 29.43% return vs 8.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMBD or DCMT?

EMBD is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DCMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMBD or DCMT?

EMBD has the higher dividend yield at 5.69%, compared with 2.91% for DCMT.

What is the main difference between EMBD and DCMT?

EMBD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while DCMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and DoubleLine. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMBD and 0.66% for DCMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DCMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 vs 1.49), 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.