EMHC vs. RBIL
EMHC (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) 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 RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EMHC returned 11.29% vs 3.95% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. EMHC charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
EMHC vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMHC achieves a 2.11% return, which is significantly lower than RBIL's 2.31% return.
EMHC
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 1.78%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.23%
- 1Y
- 11.29%
- 3Y*
- 8.52%
- 5Y*
- 1.60%
- 10Y*
- —
RBIL
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- YTD
- 2.31%
- 6M
- 2.35%
- 1Y
- 3.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMHC vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 2.11% | 11.24% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.31% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMHC and RBIL is -0.25, 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 | -0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
EMHC vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
EMHC
RBIL
EMHC vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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 | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 2.06 | -0.67 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.59 | 7.59 | -4.99 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.81 | 44.07 | -33.26 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMHC vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMHC drawdown since its inception was -28.03%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMHC and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMHC | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.03% | -0.52% | -27.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.37% | -0.52% | -3.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.03% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | -0.51% | +0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.81% | -0.07% | -9.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.05% | 0.09% | +0.96% |
Volatility
EMHC vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that EMHC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMHC | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.63% | 0.36% | +1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.29% | 0.85% | +3.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.52% | 0.95% | +4.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.06% | 1.07% | +7.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.94% | 1.07% | +7.87% |
EMHC vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMHC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
EMHC vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
EMHC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.08%, more than RBIL's 4.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 6.08% | 6.16% | 5.95% | 5.12% | 5.11% | 2.97% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.38% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMHC and RBIL have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMHC has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMHC dropped -28.03% vs RBIL's -0.52%.
On 1-year performance, EMHC leads with 11.29% vs 3.95% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EMHC has performed better with a 11.29% return vs 3.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for EMHC.
EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.08%, compared with 4.38% for RBIL.
EMHC is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. EMHC tracks Bloomberg Emerging USD Bond Core Index - Benchmark TR Net, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for EMHC and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs 2.06), 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.
Find the right allocation for EMHC and RBIL
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