EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L
EMDH.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) and CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMDH.L tracks the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index while CNYB.L tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMDH.L returned 4.88%/yr vs 4.85%/yr for CNYB.L. At a correlation of -0.20, they often move in opposite directions. EMDH.L charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNYB.L.
Performance
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
EMDH.L is traded in GBp, while CNYB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the CNYB.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMDH.L achieves a -1.83% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.08% return.
EMDH.L
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- -0.42%
- 6M
- -2.12%
- YTD
- -1.83%
- 1Y
- 2.22%
- 3Y*
- 4.88%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNYB.L
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- 6M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 5.08%
- 1Y
- 7.11%
- 3Y*
- 4.85%
- 5Y*
- 3.58%
- 10Y*
- —
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMDH.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | -1.83% | 7.78% | 5.38% | 5.73% | -12.44% | 0.25% |
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.08% | -2.20% | 6.65% | -4.09% | 6.21% | -1.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMDH.L and CNYB.L is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.23 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2021 | -0.20 |
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
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank
EMDH.L
CNYB.L
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (EMDH.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L). 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.
| EMDH.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 1.21 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.46 | 2.57 | -2.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.17 | 6.13 | -4.96 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMDH.L drawdown since its inception was -18.65%, smaller than the maximum CNYB.L drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDH.L and CNYB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMDH.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.65% | -25.82% | +7.17% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.44% | -2.75% | -1.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.44% | -9.03% | +4.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -15.44% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.12% | -7.25% | +5.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.27% | -12.53% | +6.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.77% | 1.16% | +0.61% |
Volatility
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (EMDH.L) is 0.74%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) has a volatility of 1.68%. This indicates that EMDH.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMDH.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.74% | 1.68% | -0.94% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.76% | 4.69% | -0.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.17% | 6.29% | -2.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.22% | 7.66% | -2.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.22% | 11.48% | -6.26% |
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMDH.L has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMDH.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison
EMDH.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.68%, more than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.72% | 1.89% | 2.24% | 2.55% | 2.72% | 2.74% | 2.65% | 0.72% |
EMDH.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 2.68% | 5.29% | 4.90% | 4.53% | 2.36% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMDH.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNYB.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNYB.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for EMDH.L.
EMDH.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: L&G and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for EMDH.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.
Find the right allocation for EMDH.L and CNYB.L
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