EMHC vs. EMBD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EMHC (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and EMBD (Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. EMHC is passively managed, while EMBD is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMHC returned 1.55%/yr vs 2.87%/yr for EMBD. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMHC charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for EMBD.

Performance

EMHC vs. EMBD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMHC achieves a 1.57% return, which is significantly higher than EMBD's 1.27% return.

EMHC

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 11.54%
• 3Y*: 8.74%
• 5Y*: 1.55%
• 10Y*: —

EMBD

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 0.94%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 2.05%
• 1Y: 10.34%
• 3Y*: 9.44%
• 5Y*: 2.87%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMHC vs. EMBD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.57%	14.07%	3.52%	10.06%	-17.75%	1.68%
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	1.27%	12.55%	6.76%	10.60%	-13.84%	1.95%

Correlation

The correlation between EMHC and EMBD is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.74
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2021	0.80

The correlation between EMHC and EMBD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMHC vs. EMBD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMHC	EMBD
Financial Services	100.0%	0.8%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

EMHC vs. EMBD — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMHC

EMHC Risk / Return Rank: 64
EMHC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
EMHC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
EMHC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EMHC Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EMHC Martin Ratio Rank: 62

EMBD

EMBD Risk / Return Rank: 52
EMBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
EMBD Omega Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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. EMBD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) and Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD). 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.

	EMHC	EMBD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	1.73	+0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.24	2.59	+0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.32	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.65	2.45	+0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.09	9.52	+1.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMHC vs. EMBD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMHC Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is comparable to the EMBD Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMHC and EMBD, 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

	EMHC	EMBD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	1.73	+0.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	0.31	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.22	0.46	-0.24

Drawdowns

EMHC vs. EMBD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMHC drawdown since its inception was -28.03%, which is greater than EMBD's maximum drawdown of -24.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMHC and EMBD.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMHC	EMBD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.03%	-24.27%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.37%	-4.23%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.67%	-7.03%	-0.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.03%	-24.27%	-3.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-0.50%	+0.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.91%	-5.88%	-4.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.04%	1.09%	-0.05%

Volatility

EMHC vs. EMBD - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) has a higher volatility of 1.89% compared to Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) at 1.62%. This indicates that EMHC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMBD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMHC	EMBD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.89%	1.62%	+0.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.16%	4.16%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.43%	6.00%	-0.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.06%	9.17%	-0.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.96%	8.89%	+0.07%

EMHC vs. EMBD - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMHC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than EMBD's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMHC vs. EMBD - Dividend Comparison

EMHC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.11%, more than EMBD's 5.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	5.69%	5.48%	5.83%	5.29%	4.53%	4.99%	3.34%
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	6.11%	6.16%	5.95%	5.12%	5.11%	2.97%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMHC and EMBD in my portfolio?

EMHC and EMBD have a correlation of 0.72, 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 EMBD?

EMHC has higher volatility (1.89%) compared to EMBD (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMHC dropped -28.03% vs EMBD's -24.27%.

Which ETF is better, EMHC or EMBD?

On 5-year performance, EMBD leads with 2.87% vs 1.55% for EMHC. On fees, EMHC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, EMBD has been the lower-risk option at 1.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMHC or EMBD?

Over the 5-year period, EMBD has performed better with a 2.87% return vs 1.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMHC or EMBD?

EMHC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for EMBD.

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

EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.11%, compared with 5.69% for EMBD.

What is the main difference between EMHC and EMBD?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for EMHC and 0.39% for EMBD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMHC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.73), 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.