EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EMIG.L (UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM IG ESG Diversified Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc) and EMLP.L (PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMIG.L tracks the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD while EMLP.L tracks the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMIG.L returned 0.89%/yr vs 4.40%/yr for EMLP.L. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMIG.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for EMLP.L.

Performance

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM IG ESG Diversified Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (EMIG.L) and PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

EMIG.L is traded in GBp, while EMLP.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EMLP.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMIG.L achieves a 0.13% return, which is significantly lower than EMLP.L's 1.51% return.

EMIG.L

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.05%
• YTD: 0.13%
• 6M: -0.29%
• 1Y: 7.08%
• 3Y*: 2.15%
• 5Y*: 0.89%
• 10Y*: —

EMLP.L

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.73%
• YTD: 1.51%
• 6M: 1.14%
• 1Y: 9.68%
• 3Y*: 3.69%
• 5Y*: 4.40%
• 10Y*: 3.99%

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

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMIG.L UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM IG ESG Diversified Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc	0.13%	1.96%	3.34%	0.56%	-7.44%	-0.84%	5.09%	-5.65%
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc	1.51%	9.10%	-1.68%	7.52%	5.55%	-4.33%	-1.55%	-3.69%

Correlation

The correlation between EMIG.L and EMLP.L is 0.52, 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	0.52
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2019	0.57

The correlation between EMIG.L and EMLP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMIG.L

EMIG.L Risk / Return Rank: 31
EMIG.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
EMIG.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
EMIG.L Omega Ratio Rank: 32
EMIG.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EMIG.L Martin Ratio Rank: 25

EMLP.L

EMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 50
EMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
EMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
EMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 53
EMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
EMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM IG ESG Diversified Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (EMIG.L) and PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.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.

	EMIG.L	EMLP.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.22	1.79	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.83	2.59	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.32	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.40	2.25	-0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.30	6.49	-3.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIG.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the EMLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIG.L and EMLP.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

	EMIG.L	EMLP.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.22	1.79	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.11	0.54	-0.44
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.33	-0.38

Drawdowns

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMIG.L drawdown since its inception was -17.02%, smaller than the maximum EMLP.L drawdown of -20.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIG.L and EMLP.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMIG.L	EMLP.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.02%	-20.02%	+3.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.03%	-4.29%	-0.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.09%	-4.90%	-3.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.52%	-11.25%	-3.27%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-19.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.24%	-2.33%	-4.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.25%	-6.09%	-3.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.14%	1.49%	+0.65%

Volatility

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Volatility Comparison

UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM IG ESG Diversified Bond UCITS ETF (USD) A-acc (EMIG.L) and PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L) have volatilities of 1.49% and 1.50%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMIG.L	EMLP.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.49%	1.50%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.31%	4.23%	+0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.82%	5.40%	+0.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.28%	8.09%	+0.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.47%	9.52%	-0.05%

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMIG.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP.L's 0.61% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMIG.L vs. EMLP.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither EMIG.L nor EMLP.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMIG.L and EMLP.L in my portfolio?

EMIG.L and EMLP.L have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMIG.L or EMLP.L?

On fees, EMIG.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMIG.L or EMLP.L?

EMIG.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLP.L.

What is the main difference between EMIG.L and EMLP.L?

EMIG.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while EMLP.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD. They also come from different issuers: UBS and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for EMIG.L and 0.61% for EMLP.L.