EMDL.L vs. IMID.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EMDL.L (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF) and IMID.L (SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI) are both exchange-traded funds - EMDL.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while IMID.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMDL.L returned 1.57%/yr vs 12.17%/yr for IMID.L. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMDL.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for IMID.L.

Performance

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

EMDL.L is traded in GBP, while IMID.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the IMID.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMDL.L achieves a -0.66% return, which is significantly lower than IMID.L's 12.81% return.

EMDL.L

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.48%
• YTD: -0.66%
• 6M: -0.55%
• 1Y: 5.93%
• 3Y*: 2.66%
• 5Y*: 1.57%
• 10Y*: 2.73%

IMID.L

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 5.41%
• YTD: 12.81%
• 6M: 12.92%
• 1Y: 31.35%
• 3Y*: 17.80%
• 5Y*: 12.17%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMDL.L SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF	-0.66%	7.85%	-1.25%	3.50%	0.26%	-7.31%	0.02%	8.55%	1.75%
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	12.81%	13.45%	18.35%	15.57%	-7.85%	18.96%	12.72%	20.58%	-6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDL.L and IMID.L is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 30, 2018	0.36

The correlation between EMDL.L and IMID.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (5 years) to 0.42 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMDL.L

EMDL.L Risk / Return Rank: 28
EMDL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
EMDL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
EMDL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 29
EMDL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
EMDL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 25

IMID.L

IMID.L Risk / Return Rank: 75
IMID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
IMID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
IMID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 75
IMID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IMID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) and SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.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.

	EMDL.L	IMID.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	2.58	-1.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.63	3.56	-1.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.49	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.20	4.54	-3.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.34	17.18	-13.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDL.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is lower than the IMID.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDL.L and IMID.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EMDL.L	IMID.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.08	2.58	-1.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	0.85	-0.63
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	0.57	-0.45

Drawdowns

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDL.L drawdown since its inception was -27.54%, smaller than the maximum IMID.L drawdown of -37.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDL.L and IMID.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMDL.L	IMID.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.54%	-37.84%	+10.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.91%	-6.85%	+1.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.91%	-18.69%	+13.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-8.41%	-18.69%	+10.28%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-16.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.44%	-0.29%	-3.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.41%	-3.69%	-5.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.77%	1.82%	-0.05%

Volatility

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) is 2.00%, while SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (IMID.L) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that EMDL.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMID.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMDL.L	IMID.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.00%	3.55%	-1.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.52%	9.34%	-4.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.45%	12.05%	-6.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.22%	14.26%	-7.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.07%	20.46%	-11.39%

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDL.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IMID.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMDL.L vs. IMID.L - Dividend Comparison

EMDL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, while IMID.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMDL.L SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF	5.09%	4.87%	4.87%	4.23%	4.03%	4.01%	3.97%	4.56%	4.06%	4.92%	4.02%	5.26%
IMID.L SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMDL.L and IMID.L in my portfolio?

EMDL.L and IMID.L have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMDL.L or IMID.L?

On fees, IMID.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMDL.L or IMID.L?

IMID.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMDL.L.

What is the main difference between EMDL.L and IMID.L?

EMDL.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while IMID.L is Global Equities. EMDL.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while IMID.L tracks MSCI ACWI NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMDL.L and 0.40% for IMID.L.