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

Performance

EMBX vs. XEMD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) and BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD). 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 3.49% return, which is significantly higher than XEMD's 2.75% return.


EMBX

1D
-0.40%
1M
0.90%
YTD
3.49%
6M
3.62%
1Y
15.18%
3Y*
10.16%
5Y*
3.88%
10Y*
5.10%

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)

EMBX vs. XEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
EMBX
VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF
3.49%18.80%3.09%9.34%8.28%
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 EMBX and XEMD is 0.69, 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

0.69

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

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022

0.58

The correlation between EMBX and XEMD shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (3 years) to 0.69 (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. XEMD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMBX
EMBX Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
EMBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMBX Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
EMBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMBX Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

XEMD
XEMD Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
XEMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEMD Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XEMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEMD Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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. XEMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) 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.


EMBXXEMDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.51

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.96

3.39

-0.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.58

15.27

-2.68

EMBX vs. XEMD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMBX Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is comparable to the XEMD Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMBX 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMBXXEMDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.66

2.57

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

1.39

-0.87

Drawdowns

EMBX vs. XEMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMBX drawdown since its inception was -25.11%, which is greater than XEMD's maximum drawdown of -10.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMBX and XEMD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMBXXEMDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.11%

-10.01%

-15.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.14%

-3.52%

-1.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.41%

-4.31%

-3.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.07%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.62%

-0.37%

-0.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.08%

-1.26%

-5.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.21%

0.78%

+0.43%

Volatility

EMBX vs. XEMD - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBX) has a higher volatility of 1.73% compared to BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) at 1.43%. This indicates that EMBX'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMBXXEMDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.73%

1.43%

+0.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.77%

3.70%

+1.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.72%

4.66%

+1.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.10%

6.88%

-0.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.65%

6.88%

-0.23%

EMBX vs. XEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMBX has a 0.76% expense ratio, which is higher than XEMD's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMBX vs. XEMD - Dividend Comparison

EMBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, more than XEMD's 5.82% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMBX
VanEck Emerging Markets Bond ETF
5.91%6.95%8.20%5.49%8.21%5.50%6.56%7.89%7.25%7.66%3.94%6.84%
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%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMBX and XEMD have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMBX has higher volatility (1.73%) compared to XEMD (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMBX dropped -25.11% vs XEMD's -10.01%.

On 3-year performance, XEMD leads with 11.23% vs 10.16% for EMBX. 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.

Over the 3-year period, XEMD has performed better with a 11.23% return vs 10.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XEMD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.76% for EMBX.

EMBX has the higher dividend yield at 5.91%, compared with 5.82% for XEMD.

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.76% for EMBX and 0.29% for XEMD.

EMBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 2.57), 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 XEMD

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