PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMDV vs. EMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMDV vs. EMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMDV achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly lower than EMB's 2.33% return. Over the past 10 years, EMDV has underperformed EMB with an annualized return of 2.58%, while EMB has yielded a comparatively higher 3.32% annualized return.


EMDV

1D
0.25%
1M
-1.09%
YTD
-0.55%
6M
-1.04%
1Y
6.45%
3Y*
2.73%
5Y*
-3.06%
10Y*
2.58%

EMB

1D
-0.34%
1M
1.72%
YTD
2.33%
6M
2.30%
1Y
11.30%
3Y*
9.42%
5Y*
1.91%
10Y*
3.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMDV vs. EMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
-0.55%11.90%0.06%-1.03%-18.19%1.11%-0.09%14.93%-7.52%26.98%
EMB
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
2.33%13.85%5.54%10.62%-18.63%-2.23%5.42%15.48%-5.47%10.28%

Correlation

The correlation between EMDV and EMB is 0.51, 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

0.51

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

0.38

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

0.39

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

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 27, 2016

0.42

The correlation between EMDV and EMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.38 (3 years) to 0.51 (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

EMDV vs. EMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMDV
EMDV Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
EMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
EMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

EMB
EMB Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
EMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMB Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
EMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
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.

EMDV vs. EMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB). 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.


EMDVEMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.39

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.89

2.52

-1.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.57

10.72

-8.16

EMDV vs. EMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is lower than the EMB Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMDV and EMB, 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

EMDV vs. EMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMDV drawdown since its inception was -39.20%, which is greater than EMB's maximum drawdown of -34.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMDV and EMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMDVEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.20%

-34.70%

-4.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.24%

-4.51%

-2.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.71%

-7.95%

-12.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.13%

-28.74%

-5.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.20%

-28.74%

-10.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-16.25%

-0.34%

-15.91%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.55%

-5.05%

-8.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.52%

1.06%

+1.46%

Volatility

EMDV vs. EMB - Volatility Comparison

ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF (EMDV) has a higher volatility of 4.07% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) at 1.77%. This indicates that EMDV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMDVEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.07%

1.77%

+2.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.67%

4.70%

+4.97%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.48%

5.69%

+5.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.45%

9.76%

+5.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.19%

9.96%

+8.23%

EMDV vs. EMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EMB's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMDV vs. EMB - Dividend Comparison

EMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, less than EMB's 5.03% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMB
iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF
5.03%4.98%5.46%4.74%5.04%3.89%3.88%4.51%5.64%4.54%4.83%4.84%
EMDV
ProShares MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Growers ETF
2.45%2.46%2.79%1.88%3.68%2.12%3.12%2.38%1.27%2.09%2.87%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMDV and EMB have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMDV has higher volatility (4.07%) compared to EMB (1.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMDV dropped -39.20% vs EMB's -34.70%.

On 10-year performance, EMB leads with 3.32% vs 2.58% for EMDV. On fees, EMB is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, EMB has performed better with a 3.32% return vs 2.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMB is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for EMDV.

EMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.03%, compared with 2.45% for EMDV.

EMDV is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EMB is Emerging Markets Bonds. EMDV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Dividend Masters Index, while EMB tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for EMDV and 0.39% for EMB.

EMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 0.57), 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 EMDV and EMB

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