PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EMBE.L vs. CNYA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EMBE.L vs. CNYA

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

EMBE.L (iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist)) and CNYA (iShares MSCI China A ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMBE.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPM EMBI Global Diversified Hedge TR EUR, while CNYA is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMBE.L returned -0.43%/yr vs -0.24%/yr for CNYA. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMBE.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CNYA.

Performance

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a €10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist) (EMBE.L) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EMBE.L is traded in EUR, while CNYA is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CNYA values have been converted to EUR using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMBE.L achieves a 1.23% return, which is significantly lower than CNYA's 8.39% return.

EMBE.L

1D
0.81%
1M
1.12%
YTD
1.23%
6M
1.69%
1Y
8.49%
3Y*
7.36%
5Y*
-0.43%
10Y*
1.09%

CNYA

1D
1.04%
1M
-3.51%
YTD
8.39%
6M
11.72%
1Y
32.77%
3Y*
8.20%
5Y*
-0.24%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMBE.L
iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist)		1.23%10.99%4.00%7.66%-20.86%-3.27%3.35%12.27%-8.40%8.13%
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		8.39%11.47%18.10%-16.34%-21.96%11.28%29.87%39.02%-23.11%14.89%

Correlation

The correlation between EMBE.L and CNYA is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.28

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

0.07

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

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2016

0.14

The correlation between EMBE.L and CNYA shifts across timeframes, from 0.07 (3 years) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EMBE.L
CNYA

Basic Materials

-

10.6%

Communication Services

-

0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.7%

Energy

-

3.2%

Healthcare

-

3.8%

Industrials

-

18.3%

Real Estate

-

0.7%

Technology

-

30.0%

Utilities

-

3.2%

Financial Services

-0.3%
17.0%

Basic Materials

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
10.6%

Communication Services

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
0.6%

Consumer Cyclical

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
5.7%

Consumer Defensive

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
6.7%

Energy

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
3.2%

Healthcare

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
3.8%

Industrials

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
18.3%

Real Estate

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
0.7%

Technology

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
30.0%

Utilities

EMBE.L

-

CNYA
3.2%

Financial Services

EMBE.L
-0.3%
CNYA
17.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist)

iShares MSCI China A ETF

Often compared with EMBE.L:
EMBE.L vs. EMBEMBE.L vs. CEMBEMBE.L vs. SEMB.LEMBE.L vs. XUHY.LEMBE.L vs. VWOBEMBE.L vs. PCYEMBE.L vs. JEPQ
Often compared with CNYA:
CNYA vs. MCHICNYA vs. ASHRCNYA vs. ICHN.ASCNYA vs. KBACNYA vs. FLCHCNYA vs. ICGA.DECNYA vs. GXC

Return for Risk

EMBE.L vs. CNYA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EMBE.L
EMBE.L Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
EMBE.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMBE.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMBE.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
EMBE.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMBE.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
CNYA
CNYA Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
CNYA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CNYA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
CNYA Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
CNYA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
CNYA Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist) (EMBE.L) and iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA). 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.

EMBE.LCNYADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.43
1.92

-0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.31
2.65

-0.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.34

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.84

4.89

-3.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.04

12.39

-5.35

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBE.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the CNYA Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBE.L and CNYA, 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

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBE.L drawdown since its inception was -30.73%, smaller than the maximum CNYA drawdown of -43.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBE.L and CNYA.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EMBE.LCNYADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.73%

-43.64%

+12.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.58%

-6.74%

+2.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.94%

-32.98%

+25.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.46%

-42.08%

+11.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.73%

-43.64%

+12.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.70%

-12.00%

+8.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.38%

-16.16%

+8.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.20%

2.65%

-1.45%

Volatility

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist) (EMBE.L) is 2.14%, while iShares MSCI China A ETF (CNYA) has a volatility of 5.78%. This indicates that EMBE.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EMBE.LCNYADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.14%

5.78%

-3.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.88%

11.99%

-7.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.91%

17.15%

-11.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.90%

22.97%

-14.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.48%

23.26%

-13.78%

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBE.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYA's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMBE.L vs. CNYA - Dividend Comparison

EMBE.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%, more than CNYA's 1.79% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CNYA
iShares MSCI China A ETF		1.79%1.92%2.51%4.23%2.69%1.11%1.06%1.21%3.92%0.97%1.38%0.00%
EMBE.L
iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond EUR Hedged UCITS ETF (Dist)		5.13%5.44%5.64%5.50%5.39%3.92%3.85%4.77%5.75%3.88%5.36%4.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

EMBE.L and CNYA have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EMBE.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EMBE.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CNYA.

EMBE.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while CNYA is China Equities. EMBE.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified Hedge TR EUR, while CNYA tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for EMBE.L and 0.60% for CNYA.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMBE.L and CNYA

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