EMES.L vs. IGV

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EMES.L (iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF) and IGV (iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMES.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while IGV is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S&P North American Expanded Technology Software Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMES.L returned 1.35%/yr vs 6.77%/yr for IGV. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMES.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGV.

Performance

EMES.L vs. IGV - 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 Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF (IGV). 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 higher than IGV's -5.33% 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*: —

IGV

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 13.36%
• YTD: -5.33%
• 6M: -7.31%
• 1Y: -4.52%
• 3Y*: 14.61%
• 5Y*: 6.77%
• 10Y*: 16.80%

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

EMES.L vs. IGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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%	15.66%	-0.48%
IGV iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF	-5.33%	5.56%	23.41%	58.56%	-35.65%	12.30%	52.86%	34.33%	-14.56%

Correlation

The correlation between EMES.L and IGV is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018	0.30

The correlation between EMES.L and IGV shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (1 year) to 0.30 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

EMES.L vs. IGV — 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

IGV

IGV Risk / Return Rank: 8
IGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
IGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
IGV Omega Ratio Rank: 8
IGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
IGV Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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. IGV - 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 Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF (IGV). 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	IGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	-0.16	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	-0.04	+2.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	0.99	+0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	-0.12	+2.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.84	-0.26	+10.11
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. IGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMES.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is higher than the IGV Sharpe Ratio of -0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMES.L and IGV, 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	IGV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.95	-0.16	+2.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16	0.24	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.64	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.37	-0.02

Drawdowns

EMES.L vs. IGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMES.L drawdown since its inception was -28.84%, smaller than the maximum IGV drawdown of -63.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMES.L and IGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMES.L	IGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.84%	-63.45%	+34.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.48%	-36.61%	+32.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.22%	-36.61%	+29.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.84%	-45.85%	+17.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.35%	-15.05%	+14.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.85%	-14.45%	+6.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.08%	17.25%	-16.17%

Volatility

EMES.L vs. IGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF (EMES.L) is 2.26%, while iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF (IGV) has a volatility of 11.62%. This indicates that EMES.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMES.L	IGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.26%	11.62%	-9.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.55%	24.36%	-19.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.47%	27.59%	-22.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.28%	27.84%	-19.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.24%	26.34%	-17.10%

EMES.L vs. IGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMES.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than IGV's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMES.L vs. IGV - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IGV iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.01%	0.00%	0.35%	0.02%	0.16%	0.09%	0.82%	0.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMES.L and IGV in my portfolio?

EMES.L and IGV have a correlation of 0.18, 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 IGV?

On fees, IGV is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMES.L or IGV?

IGV is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for EMES.L.

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

EMES.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while IGV is Technology Equities. EMES.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while IGV tracks S&P North American Expanded Technology Software Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EMES.L and 0.39% for IGV.