PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMLB.L vs. EMLP.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMLB.L vs. EMLP.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.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.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMLB.L achieves a 2.92% return, which is significantly higher than EMLP.L's 2.53% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with EMLB.L having a 3.11% annualized return and EMLP.L not far ahead at 3.12%.


EMLB.L

1D
0.25%
1M
0.05%
6M
2.30%
YTD
2.92%
1Y
8.68%
3Y*
5.90%
5Y*
3.98%
10Y*
3.11%

EMLP.L

1D
0.11%
1M
-0.17%
6M
1.99%
YTD
2.53%
1Y
8.40%
3Y*
5.74%
5Y*
4.04%
10Y*
3.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

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


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMLB.L
PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
2.92%17.08%-3.25%13.74%-5.70%-5.53%1.91%13.10%-6.90%12.55%
EMLP.L
PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc
2.53%17.33%-3.31%13.19%-5.73%-5.19%1.46%13.96%-7.04%12.19%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLB.L and EMLP.L is 0.74, 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

0.74

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2011

0.68

The correlation between EMLB.L and EMLP.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

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

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

EMLB.L
EMLB.L Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
EMLB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMLB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMLB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
EMLB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMLB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

EMLP.L
EMLP.L Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
EMLP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMLP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMLP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
EMLP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMLP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 4242
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.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.

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.


EMLB.LEMLP.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.23

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.54

1.40

+0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.03

4.45

+0.58

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

The current EMLB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is comparable to the EMLP.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMLB.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EMLB.L vs. EMLP.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLB.L drawdown since its inception was -29.75%, smaller than the maximum EMLP.L drawdown of -54.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLB.L and EMLP.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMLB.LEMLP.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.75%

-54.49%

+24.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.48%

-5.82%

+0.34%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.50%

-7.37%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.09%

-19.19%

-0.90%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.37%

-20.62%

-0.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.04%

-25.94%

+24.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.33%

-36.30%

+26.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.68%

1.83%

-0.15%

Volatility

EMLB.L vs. EMLP.L - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.L) has a higher volatility of 2.03% compared to PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L) at 1.30%. This indicates that EMLB.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMLB.LEMLP.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.03%

1.30%

+0.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.19%

5.41%

+0.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.00%

6.49%

+0.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.48%

9.03%

+0.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.58%

9.16%

+0.42%

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

EMLB.L has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP.L's 0.61% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMLB.L vs. EMLP.L - Dividend Comparison

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


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EMLB.L and EMLP.L have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EMLB.L is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLP.L.

EMLB.L tracks PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Currency Bond Index, while EMLP.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for EMLB.L and 0.61% for EMLP.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMLB.L and EMLP.L

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