EMES.L vs. EMVL.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EMES.L (iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF) and EMVL.L (iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - EMES.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while EMVL.L is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMES.L returned 1.35%/yr vs 16.16%/yr for EMVL.L. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMES.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for EMVL.L.

Performance

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF (EMES.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMES.L achieves a 1.50% return, which is significantly lower than EMVL.L's 43.83% return.

EMES.L

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 1.02%
• YTD: 1.50%
• 6M: 2.10%
• 1Y: 10.68%
• 3Y*: 9.03%
• 5Y*: 1.35%
• 10Y*: —

EMVL.L

• 1D: -2.57%
• 1M: 10.78%
• YTD: 43.83%
• 6M: 48.06%
• 1Y: 85.89%
• 3Y*: 37.66%
• 5Y*: 16.16%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMES.L iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF	1.50%	13.10%	5.45%	9.57%	-18.82%	-2.59%	5.41%	15.64%
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	43.83%	43.13%	14.48%	18.38%	-16.29%	5.29%	7.16%	17.77%

Correlation

The correlation between EMES.L and EMVL.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	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.38
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2019	0.43

Return for Risk

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMES.L

EMES.L Risk / Return Rank: 59
EMES.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
EMES.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
EMES.L Omega Ratio Rank: 65
EMES.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
EMES.L Martin Ratio Rank: 57

EMVL.L

EMVL.L Risk / Return Rank: 94
EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EMVL.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EMVL.L Omega Ratio Rank: 94
EMVL.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EMVL.L Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF (EMES.L) and iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.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.

	EMES.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	4.07	-2.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	4.83	-1.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.69	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	7.25	-4.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.84	25.10	-15.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMES.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is lower than the EMVL.L Sharpe Ratio of 4.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMES.L and EMVL.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

	EMES.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.95	4.07	-2.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16	0.81	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.81	-0.47

Drawdowns

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMES.L drawdown since its inception was -28.84%, smaller than the maximum EMVL.L drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES.L and EMVL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMES.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.84%	-34.95%	+6.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.48%	-11.65%	+7.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.22%	-16.43%	+9.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.84%	-34.57%	+5.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.35%	-4.20%	+3.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.85%	-9.98%	+2.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.08%	3.39%	-2.31%

Volatility

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF (EMES.L) is 2.26%, while iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc) (EMVL.L) has a volatility of 9.56%. This indicates that EMES.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMVL.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMES.L	EMVL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.26%	9.56%	-7.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.55%	17.52%	-12.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.47%	20.79%	-15.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.28%	20.00%	-11.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.24%	22.24%	-13.00%

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMES.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than EMVL.L's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMES.L vs. EMVL.L - Dividend Comparison

EMES.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.78%, while EMVL.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMES.L iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF	5.78%	5.78%	5.45%	5.41%	5.03%	3.48%	3.49%	4.60%	0.50%
EMVL.L iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD(Acc)	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 EMES.L and EMVL.L in my portfolio?

EMES.L and EMVL.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, EMES.L or EMVL.L?

On fees, EMVL.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, EMES.L or EMVL.L?

EMVL.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for EMES.L.

What is the main difference between EMES.L and EMVL.L?

EMES.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while EMVL.L is Emerging Markets Equities. EMES.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while EMVL.L tracks MSCI EM NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EMES.L and 0.40% for EMVL.L.