EMBD vs. XEMD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMBD (Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and XEMD (BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. EMBD is actively managed, while XEMD is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMBD returned 9.44%/yr vs 11.23%/yr for XEMD. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMBD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for XEMD.

Performance

EMBD vs. XEMD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMBD achieves a 1.27% return, which is significantly lower than XEMD's 2.75% return.

EMBD

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 0.94%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 2.05%
• 1Y: 10.34%
• 3Y*: 9.44%
• 5Y*: 2.87%
• 10Y*: —

XEMD

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 1.21%
• YTD: 2.75%
• 6M: 3.27%
• 1Y: 11.88%
• 3Y*: 11.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMBD vs. XEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	1.27%	12.55%	6.76%	10.60%	3.47%
XEMD BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF	2.75%	13.98%	8.77%	10.26%	1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between EMBD and XEMD is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022	0.76

The correlation between EMBD and XEMD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMBD vs. XEMD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMBD

EMBD Risk / Return Rank: 52
EMBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
EMBD Omega Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Martin Ratio Rank: 55

XEMD

XEMD Risk / Return Rank: 79
XEMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
XEMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
XEMD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
XEMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
XEMD Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. XEMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) and BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD). 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.

	EMBD	XEMD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.73	2.57	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.59	3.88	-1.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.51	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	3.39	-0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.52	15.27	-5.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMBD vs. XEMD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBD Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is lower than the XEMD Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBD and XEMD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMBD	XEMD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.73	2.57	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.46	1.39	-0.94

Drawdowns

EMBD vs. XEMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBD drawdown since its inception was -24.27%, which is greater than XEMD's maximum drawdown of -10.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBD and XEMD.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMBD	XEMD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.27%	-10.01%	-14.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.23%	-3.52%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.03%	-4.31%	-2.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.50%	-0.37%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.88%	-1.26%	-4.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	0.78%	+0.31%

Volatility

EMBD vs. XEMD - Volatility Comparison

Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) has a higher volatility of 1.62% compared to BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) at 1.43%. This indicates that EMBD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XEMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMBD	XEMD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.62%	1.43%	+0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.16%	3.70%	+0.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.00%	4.66%	+1.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.17%	6.88%	+2.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.89%	6.88%	+2.01%

EMBD vs. XEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than XEMD's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMBD vs. XEMD - Dividend Comparison

EMBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.69%, less than XEMD's 5.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	5.69%	5.48%	5.83%	5.29%	4.53%	4.99%	3.34%
XEMD BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF	5.82%	6.15%	6.30%	6.19%	3.08%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMBD and XEMD in my portfolio?

EMBD and XEMD have a correlation of 0.68, 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 XEMD?

EMBD has higher volatility (1.62%) compared to XEMD (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBD dropped -24.27% vs XEMD's -10.01%.

Which ETF is better, EMBD or XEMD?

On 3-year performance, XEMD leads with 11.23% vs 9.44% for EMBD. On fees, XEMD is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, XEMD has been the lower-risk option at 1.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMBD or XEMD?

Over the 3-year period, XEMD has performed better with a 11.23% return vs 9.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMBD or XEMD?

XEMD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMBD.

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

XEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.82%, compared with 5.69% for EMBD.

What is the main difference between EMBD and XEMD?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMBD and 0.29% for XEMD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XEMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.73), 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.