EMHC vs. DCMT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

EMHC (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMHC is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Emerging USD Bond Core Index - Benchmark TR Net, while DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine. EMHC is passively managed, while DCMT is actively managed. Over the past year, EMHC returned 10.04% vs 29.43% for DCMT. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. EMHC charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.66%/yr for DCMT.

Performance

EMHC vs. DCMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMHC achieves a 1.68% return, which is significantly lower than DCMT's 26.32% return.

EMHC

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: -0.72%
• 6M: 1.72%
• YTD: 1.68%
• 1Y: 10.04%
• 3Y*: 8.01%
• 5Y*: 1.40%
• 10Y*: —

DCMT

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: 2.50%
• 6M: 21.40%
• YTD: 26.32%
• 1Y: 29.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EMHC vs. DCMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.68%	14.07%	5.02%
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	26.32%	6.04%	3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between EMHC and DCMT is -0.33, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	-0.12

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between EMHC and DCMT has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.12 to -0.33, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Return for Risk

EMHC vs. DCMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMHC

EMHC Risk / Return Rank: 71
EMHC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
EMHC Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EMHC Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EMHC Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
EMHC Martin Ratio Rank: 68

DCMT

DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 52
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 54
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

EMHC vs. DCMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) and DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT). 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.

	EMHC	DCMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	1.58	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	2.18	+0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.27	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	1.85	+0.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.64	6.54	+3.10

EMHC vs. DCMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMHC Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the DCMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMHC and DCMT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMHC vs. DCMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMHC drawdown since its inception was -28.03%, which is greater than DCMT's maximum drawdown of -15.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMHC and DCMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMHC	DCMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.03%	-15.96%	-12.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.37%	-15.96%	+11.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.67%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.80%	-9.33%	+8.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.69%	-3.54%	-6.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.04%	4.51%	-3.47%

Volatility

EMHC vs. DCMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) is 1.18%, while DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a volatility of 5.79%. This indicates that EMHC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DCMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMHC	DCMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.18%	5.79%	-4.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.34%	16.87%	-12.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.42%	18.76%	-13.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.07%	16.01%	-6.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.89%	16.01%	-7.12%

EMHC vs. DCMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMHC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than DCMT's 0.66% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMHC vs. DCMT - Dividend Comparison

EMHC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.12%, more than DCMT's 2.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	2.91%	3.67%	1.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	6.12%	6.16%	5.95%	5.12%	5.11%	2.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMHC and DCMT in my portfolio?

EMHC and DCMT have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMHC or DCMT?

DCMT has higher volatility (5.79%) compared to EMHC (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMHC dropped -28.03% vs DCMT's -15.96%.

Which ETF is better, EMHC or DCMT?

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 29.43% vs 10.04% for EMHC. On fees, EMHC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, EMHC has been the lower-risk option at 1.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMHC or DCMT?

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 29.43% return vs 10.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMHC or DCMT?

EMHC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.66% for DCMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMHC or DCMT?

EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.12%, compared with 2.91% for DCMT.

What is the main difference between EMHC and DCMT?

EMHC is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while DCMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: State Street and DoubleLine. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for EMHC and 0.66% for DCMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMHC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.58), 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.