PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMBX vs. LEMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMBX vs. LEMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMBX achieves a 3.91% return, which is significantly higher than LEMB's 1.77% return. Over the past 10 years, EMBX has outperformed LEMB with an annualized return of 5.15%, while LEMB has yielded a comparatively lower 1.42% annualized return.


EMBX

1D
0.26%
1M
0.74%
YTD
3.91%
6M
4.43%
1Y
15.86%
3Y*
10.31%
5Y*
4.02%
10Y*
5.15%

LEMB

1D
0.18%
1M
1.23%
YTD
1.77%
6M
3.21%
1Y
10.13%
3Y*
6.29%
5Y*
0.86%
10Y*
1.42%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMBX vs. LEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMBX
VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF
3.91%18.80%3.09%9.34%-7.21%-4.30%11.57%13.10%-6.21%11.97%
LEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF
1.77%18.02%-1.72%7.23%-10.74%-9.92%3.10%6.40%-7.49%12.49%

Correlation

The correlation between EMBX and LEMB is 0.77, 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

0.77

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

0.69

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

0.65

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2012

0.59

The correlation between EMBX and LEMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (all time) to 0.77 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. LEMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMBX
EMBX Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
EMBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMBX Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
EMBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMBX Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

LEMB
LEMB Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
LEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
LEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

EMBX vs. LEMB - 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 EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB). 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.


EMBXLEMBDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.79

1.56

+1.23

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.12

2.18

+1.93

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.30

+0.25

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.08

1.78

+1.30

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.12

6.09

+7.03

EMBX vs. LEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBX Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is higher than the LEMB Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBX and LEMB, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMBXLEMBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.79

1.56

+1.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

0.10

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.78

0.15

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

0.05

+0.48

Drawdowns

EMBX vs. LEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBX drawdown since its inception was -25.11%, smaller than the maximum LEMB drawdown of -30.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBX and LEMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMBXLEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.11%

-30.82%

+5.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.14%

-6.00%

+0.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.41%

-10.09%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.07%

-25.29%

+1.22%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.11%

-29.09%

+3.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.23%

-4.32%

+4.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.08%

-12.74%

+5.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.21%

1.76%

-0.55%

Volatility

EMBX vs. LEMB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) is 1.78%, while iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) has a volatility of 2.07%. This indicates that EMBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMBXLEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.78%

2.07%

-0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.75%

5.31%

-0.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.71%

6.53%

-0.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.10%

8.24%

-2.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.65%

9.29%

-2.64%

EMBX vs. LEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBX has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than LEMB's 0.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMBX vs. LEMB - Dividend Comparison

EMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.89%, more than LEMB's 2.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMBX
VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF
5.89%6.95%8.20%5.49%8.21%5.50%6.56%7.89%7.25%7.66%3.94%6.84%
LEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF
2.40%2.44%0.00%1.34%0.86%3.89%0.00%4.39%3.46%0.00%0.00%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMBX and LEMB have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LEMB has higher volatility (2.07%) compared to EMBX (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBX dropped -25.11% vs LEMB's -30.82%.

On 10-year performance, EMBX leads with 5.15% vs 1.42% for LEMB. On fees, LEMB is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EMBX has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. 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 5.15% return vs 1.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LEMB is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for EMBX.

EMBX has the higher dividend yield at 5.89%, compared with 2.40% for LEMB.

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for EMBX and 0.30% for LEMB.

EMBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 1.56), 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 EMBX and LEMB

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