PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMBD vs. TLT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMBD vs. TLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMBD achieves a 1.04% return, which is significantly higher than TLT's -3.49% return.


EMBD

1D
-0.08%
1M
-1.19%
6M
0.46%
YTD
1.04%
1Y
6.44%
3Y*
8.44%
5Y*
2.72%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.90%

TLT

1D
-0.66%
1M
-3.81%
6M
-3.46%
YTD
-3.49%
1Y
-2.45%
3Y*
-1.80%
5Y*
-8.18%
10Y*
-2.38%
ALL TIME*
3.47%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$320.84K$346.54K$393.80K
$2.33B$2.02B$2.19B

EMBD vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
EMBD
Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF
1.04%12.55%6.76%10.60%-13.84%-1.84%11.42%
TLT
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
-3.49%4.25%-8.05%2.77%-31.23%-4.60%-1.71%

Correlation

The correlation between EMBD and TLT is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.51

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.57

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020

0.50

The correlation between EMBD and TLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.57 - 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.


Return for Risk

EMBD vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EMBD
EMBD Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
EMBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMBD Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
EMBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMBD Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

TLT
TLT Risk / Return Rank: 99
Overall Rank
TLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
TLT Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
TLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
Calmar Ratio Rank
TLT Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EMBD vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). 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.


EMBDTLTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

0.99

+0.23

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.69

-0.14

+1.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.50

-0.30

+6.79

EMBD vs. TLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBD Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is higher than the TLT Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBD and TLT, 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

EMBD vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBD drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBD and TLT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMBDTLTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.27%

-48.35%

+24.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.23%

-7.74%

+3.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.15%

-14.79%

+8.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.27%

-43.70%

+19.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.33%

-42.36%

+41.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.74%

-13.99%

+8.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.10%

3.57%

-2.47%

Volatility

EMBD vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) is 1.11%, while iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) has a volatility of 2.46%. This indicates that EMBD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMBDTLTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.11%

2.46%

-1.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.20%

6.85%

-2.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.88%

9.32%

-3.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.18%

15.74%

-6.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.80%

14.83%

-6.03%

EMBD vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than TLT's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMBD vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison

EMBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.74%, more than TLT's 4.75% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMBD
Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF
5.26%5.48%5.83%5.29%4.53%4.99%3.34%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TLT
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
4.34%4.43%4.30%3.38%2.67%1.50%1.50%2.27%2.63%2.43%2.60%2.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMBD and TLT have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TLT has higher volatility (2.46%) compared to EMBD (1.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBD dropped -24.27% vs TLT's -48.35%.

On 5-year performance, EMBD leads with 2.72% vs -8.18% for TLT. On fees, TLT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EMBD has been the lower-risk option at 1.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMBD has performed better with a 2.72% return vs -8.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TLT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMBD.

EMBD has the higher dividend yield at 5.26%, compared with 4.34% for TLT.

EMBD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while TLT is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMBD and 0.15% for TLT.

EMBD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.22 vs -0.11), 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 EMBD and TLT

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