EMBX vs. EMB
EMBX (VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF) and EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. EMBX is actively managed, while EMB is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMBX returned 5.12%/yr vs 3.32%/yr for EMB. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMBX charges 0.76%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for EMB.
Performance
EMBX vs. EMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMBX achieves a 3.68% return, which is significantly higher than EMB's 2.33% return. Over the past 10 years, EMBX has outperformed EMB with an annualized return of 5.12%, while EMB has yielded a comparatively lower 3.32% annualized return.
EMBX
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- 0.99%
- YTD
- 3.68%
- 6M
- 4.19%
- 1Y
- 13.48%
- 3Y*
- 9.41%
- 5Y*
- 4.20%
- 10Y*
- 5.12%
EMB
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- 1.72%
- YTD
- 2.33%
- 6M
- 2.30%
- 1Y
- 11.30%
- 3Y*
- 9.42%
- 5Y*
- 1.91%
- 10Y*
- 3.32%
EMBX vs. EMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMBX VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 3.68% | 18.80% | 3.09% | 9.34% | -7.21% | -4.30% | 11.57% | 13.10% | -6.21% | 11.97% |
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 2.33% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 10.62% | -18.63% | -2.23% | 5.42% | 15.48% | -5.47% | 10.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMBX and EMB is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.63 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2012 | 0.56 |
Over the past year, EMBX and EMB have become more correlated (0.79) than their long-term average of 0.56, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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
EMBX vs. EMB — Risk / Return Rank
EMBX
EMB
EMBX vs. EMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB). 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.
| EMBX | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.44 | 1.39 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.63 | 2.52 | +0.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.06 | 10.72 | +0.34 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMBX vs. EMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMBX drawdown since its inception was -25.11%, smaller than the maximum EMB drawdown of -34.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBX and EMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMBX | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.11% | -34.70% | +9.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.14% | -4.51% | -0.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.41% | -7.95% | +0.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.09% | -28.74% | +5.65% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -25.11% | -28.74% | +3.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.89% | -0.34% | -0.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.05% | -5.05% | -2.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.22% | 1.06% | +0.16% |
Volatility
EMBX vs. EMB - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) has a higher volatility of 2.05% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) at 1.77%. This indicates that EMBX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMBX | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.05% | 1.77% | +0.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.07% | 4.70% | +0.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.97% | 5.69% | +0.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.14% | 9.76% | -3.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.67% | 9.96% | -3.29% |
EMBX vs. EMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMBX has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than EMB's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMBX vs. EMB - Dividend Comparison
EMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.90%, more than EMB's 5.03% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.03% | 4.98% | 5.46% | 4.74% | 5.04% | 3.89% | 3.88% | 4.51% | 5.64% | 4.54% | 4.83% | 4.84% |
EMBX VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.90% | 6.95% | 8.20% | 5.49% | 8.21% | 5.50% | 6.56% | 7.89% | 7.25% | 7.66% | 3.94% | 6.84% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMBX and EMB have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMBX has higher volatility (2.05%) compared to EMB (1.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBX dropped -25.11% vs EMB's -34.70%.
On 10-year performance, EMBX leads with 5.12% vs 3.32% for EMB. On fees, EMB is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EMBX has performed better with a 5.12% return vs 3.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EMB is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for EMBX.
EMBX has the higher dividend yield at 5.90%, compared with 5.03% for EMB.
They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for EMBX and 0.39% for EMB.
EMBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 2.00), 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.
Find the right allocation for EMBX and EMB
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