PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMLC vs. AAXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) and iShares MSCI All Country Asia ex-Japan ETF (AAXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMLC achieves a 1.40% return, which is significantly lower than AAXJ's 26.46% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLC has underperformed AAXJ with an annualized return of 2.28%, while AAXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 10.34% annualized return.


EMLC

1D
0.28%
1M
0.74%
YTD
1.40%
6M
2.50%
1Y
9.22%
3Y*
6.63%
5Y*
1.36%
10Y*
2.28%

AAXJ

1D
0.46%
1M
0.61%
YTD
26.46%
6M
29.76%
1Y
48.69%
3Y*
22.11%
5Y*
6.41%
10Y*
10.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EMLC
VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF
1.40%18.81%-2.97%11.18%-10.58%-9.72%3.08%9.79%-7.57%13.84%
AAXJ
iShares MSCI All Country Asia ex-Japan ETF
26.46%31.53%10.41%4.79%-20.35%-5.73%23.35%17.93%-15.04%41.76%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLC and AAXJ is 0.63, 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

0.63

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

0.57

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

0.58

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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010

0.57

The correlation between EMLC and AAXJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.63 - 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

EMLC vs. AAXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMLC
EMLC Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
EMLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMLC Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
EMLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMLC Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

AAXJ
AAXJ Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
AAXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
AAXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) and iShares MSCI All Country Asia ex-Japan ETF (AAXJ). 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.


EMLCAAXJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.96

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.40

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.42

3.41

-1.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.75

12.55

-7.80

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the AAXJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMLC and AAXJ, 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

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLC drawdown since its inception was -32.43%, smaller than the maximum AAXJ drawdown of -49.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLC and AAXJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMLCAAXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.43%

-49.37%

+16.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.19%

-13.66%

+7.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.15%

-19.74%

+10.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.58%

-40.64%

+16.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-26.47%

-44.52%

+18.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.83%

-4.62%

+0.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.35%

-14.01%

-0.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.86%

3.71%

-1.85%

Volatility

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) is 2.44%, while iShares MSCI All Country Asia ex-Japan ETF (AAXJ) has a volatility of 11.46%. This indicates that EMLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AAXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMLCAAXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.44%

11.46%

-9.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.17%

19.71%

-13.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.06%

22.12%

-15.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.14%

20.32%

-11.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.04%

20.42%

-10.38%

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLC has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than AAXJ's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMLC vs. AAXJ - Dividend Comparison

EMLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.16%, more than AAXJ's 1.43% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AAXJ
iShares MSCI All Country Asia ex-Japan ETF
1.43%1.81%1.86%1.95%1.74%2.21%1.06%1.83%2.10%1.99%1.77%2.44%
EMLC
VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF
6.16%5.91%6.55%5.97%5.54%5.25%4.90%6.25%6.50%5.34%5.32%6.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMLC and AAXJ have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AAXJ has higher volatility (11.46%) compared to EMLC (2.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLC dropped -32.43% vs AAXJ's -49.37%.

On 10-year performance, AAXJ leads with 10.34% vs 2.28% for EMLC. On fees, EMLC is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EMLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AAXJ has performed better with a 10.34% return vs 2.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMLC is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for AAXJ.

EMLC has the higher dividend yield at 6.16%, compared with 1.43% for AAXJ.

EMLC is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while AAXJ is Asia Pacific Equities. EMLC tracks J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index Emerging Markets Global Core Index, while AAXJ tracks MSCI All Country Asia ex Japan Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EMLC and 0.68% for AAXJ.

AAXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.25), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMLC and AAXJ

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