PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMCB vs. DHS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMCB vs. DHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund (EMCB) and WisdomTree US High Dividend Fund (DHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMCB achieves a 2.12% return, which is significantly lower than DHS's 12.61% return. Over the past 10 years, EMCB has underperformed DHS with an annualized return of 4.25%, while DHS has yielded a comparatively higher 9.73% annualized return.


EMCB

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.01%
YTD
2.12%
6M
1.71%
1Y
6.40%
3Y*
7.72%
5Y*
2.13%
10Y*
4.25%

DHS

1D
0.81%
1M
-0.18%
YTD
12.61%
6M
12.50%
1Y
22.41%
3Y*
17.58%
5Y*
11.73%
10Y*
9.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMCB vs. DHS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMCB
WisdomTree Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund
2.12%8.19%7.11%8.76%-12.98%-0.62%8.60%13.43%-3.07%9.47%
DHS
WisdomTree US High Dividend Fund
12.61%12.87%18.02%-0.19%7.97%23.20%-5.70%22.59%-7.41%11.69%

Correlation

The correlation between EMCB and DHS is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.13

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

0.17

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

0.22

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

0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2012

0.17

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

EMCB vs. DHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMCB
EMCB Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
EMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
EMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

DHS
DHS Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
DHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
DHS Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
DHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
DHS Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

EMCB vs. DHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund (EMCB) and WisdomTree US High Dividend Fund (DHS). 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.


EMCBDHSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.38

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.10

3.57

-1.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.40

12.96

-5.56

EMCB vs. DHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the DHS Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMCB and DHS, 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

EMCB vs. DHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMCB drawdown since its inception was -22.81%, smaller than the maximum DHS drawdown of -67.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMCB and DHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMCBDHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.81%

-67.25%

+44.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.07%

-6.30%

+3.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.20%

-11.87%

+7.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.50%

-15.28%

-6.22%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.81%

-37.35%

+14.54%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.55%

-1.19%

+0.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.22%

-9.53%

+5.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.87%

1.73%

-0.86%

Volatility

EMCB vs. DHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund (EMCB) is 1.47%, while WisdomTree US High Dividend Fund (DHS) has a volatility of 3.61%. This indicates that EMCB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMCBDHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.47%

3.61%

-2.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.06%

7.53%

-4.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.79%

10.20%

-6.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.93%

13.88%

-6.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.46%

16.08%

-7.62%

EMCB vs. DHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMCB has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than DHS's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMCB vs. DHS - Dividend Comparison

EMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.35%, more than DHS's 3.27% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DHS
WisdomTree US High Dividend Fund
3.27%3.32%3.66%4.31%3.42%3.29%4.14%3.69%3.76%3.00%3.25%3.53%
EMCB
WisdomTree Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund
5.35%5.47%5.29%5.09%4.04%3.43%3.85%4.17%4.20%4.04%4.08%5.09%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMCB and DHS have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DHS has higher volatility (3.61%) compared to EMCB (1.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMCB dropped -22.81% vs DHS's -67.25%.

On 10-year performance, DHS leads with 9.73% vs 4.25% for EMCB. On fees, DHS is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, EMCB has been the lower-risk option at 1.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, DHS has performed better with a 9.73% return vs 4.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DHS is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMCB.

EMCB has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 3.27% for DHS.

EMCB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while DHS is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMCB and 0.38% for DHS.

DHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.70), 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 EMCB and DHS

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