EMDL.L vs. LQDB
EMDL.L (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF) and LQDB (iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMDL.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while LQDB is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index . Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMDL.L returned 1.57%/yr vs 1.96%/yr for LQDB. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMDL.L charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for LQDB.
Performance
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
EMDL.L is traded in GBP, while LQDB is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the LQDB 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 LQDB's 1.35% 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%
LQDB
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- 1.35%
- 6M
- 0.18%
- 1Y
- 6.58%
- 3Y*
- 3.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.96%
- 10Y*
- —
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMDL.L SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF | -0.66% | 7.85% | -1.25% | 3.50% | 0.26% | 0.04% |
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 1.35% | -0.16% | 4.16% | 4.13% | -5.47% | 7.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMDL.L and LQDB is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2021 | 0.48 |
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
EMDL.L vs. LQDB — Risk / Return Rank
EMDL.L
LQDB
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - 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 iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB). 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 | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.20 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.20 | 1.30 | -0.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.34 | 3.51 | -0.17 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMDL.L | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.08 | 1.06 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.00 |
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 | 0.24 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMDL.L drawdown since its inception was -27.54%, which is greater than LQDB's maximum drawdown of -12.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDL.L and LQDB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMDL.L | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.54% | -12.38% | -15.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.91% | -5.10% | +0.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.91% | -9.11% | +4.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.41% | -12.38% | +3.97% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -16.87% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.44% | -1.72% | -1.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.41% | -5.00% | -4.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.77% | 1.88% | -0.11% |
Volatility
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF (EMDL.L) has a higher volatility of 2.00% compared to iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) at 1.47%. This indicates that EMDL.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LQDB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMDL.L | LQDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.00% | 1.47% | +0.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.52% | 4.87% | -0.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.45% | 6.24% | -0.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.22% | 8.86% | -1.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.07% | 8.83% | +0.24% |
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMDL.L has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than LQDB's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMDL.L vs. LQDB - Dividend Comparison
EMDL.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.09%, more than LQDB's 4.69% yield.
| 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% |
LQDB iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 4.69% | 4.65% | 4.46% | 3.90% | 4.14% | 1.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMDL.L and LQDB have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LQDB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LQDB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMDL.L.
EMDL.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while LQDB is Corporate Bonds. EMDL.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while LQDB tracks iBoxx USD Liquid Investment Grade BBB 0+ Index . They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EMDL.L and 0.15% for LQDB.
Find the right allocation for EMDL.L and LQDB
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