EMLC vs. CMF
EMLC (VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and CMF (iShares California Muni Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMLC is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Core Index, while CMF is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMLC returned 1.85%/yr vs 1.55%/yr for CMF. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EMLC charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for CMF.
Performance
EMLC vs. CMF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMLC achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly higher than CMF's -0.17% return. Over the past 10 years, EMLC has outperformed CMF with an annualized return of 1.85%, while CMF has yielded a comparatively lower 1.55% annualized return.
EMLC
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 0.04%
- 6M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 1.78%
- 1Y
- 7.98%
- 3Y*
- 6.20%
- 5Y*
- 1.92%
- 10Y*
- 1.85%
- ALL TIME*
- 1.20%
CMF
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -1.82%
- 6M
- -0.93%
- YTD
- -0.17%
- 1Y
- 4.37%
- 3Y*
- 2.68%
- 5Y*
- 0.31%
- 10Y*
- 1.55%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.21%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $29.81M | $26.50M | $27.09M | |
| $39.99M | $39.21M | $56.97M |
EMLC vs. CMF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLC VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 1.78% | 18.81% | -2.97% | 11.18% | -10.58% | -9.72% | 3.08% | 9.79% | -7.57% | 13.84% |
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | -0.17% | 3.36% | 1.65% | 5.71% | -8.27% | 0.78% | 4.50% | 6.94% | 0.99% | 4.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMLC and CMF is 0.45, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.45 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.38 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.40 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.24 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2010 | 0.15 |
Over the past year, EMLC and CMF have become more correlated (0.45) than their long-term average of 0.15, meaning their price movements have been converging.
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. CMF — Risk / Return Rank
EMLC
CMF
EMLC vs. CMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) and iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF). 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.
| EMLC | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.38 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.46 | 1.73 | -0.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.60 | 5.29 | -0.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMLC vs. CMF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMLC drawdown since its inception was -32.43%, which is greater than CMF's maximum drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLC and CMF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMLC | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.43% | -16.45% | -15.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.19% | -2.91% | -3.28% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.94% | -5.22% | -2.72% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.60% | -12.45% | -11.15% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.47% | -14.57% | -11.90% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.48% | -2.03% | -1.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.26% | -4.74% | -9.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.96% | 0.95% | +1.01% |
Volatility
EMLC vs. CMF - Volatility Comparison
VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) has a higher volatility of 1.88% compared to iShares California Muni Bond ETF (CMF) at 0.86%. This indicates that EMLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMLC | CMF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.88% | 0.86% | +1.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.42% | 2.28% | +4.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.17% | 2.86% | +4.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.12% | 4.21% | +4.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.92% | 5.08% | +4.84% |
EMLC vs. CMF - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMLC has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than CMF's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMLC vs. CMF - Dividend Comparison
EMLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.25%, more than CMF's 2.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CMF iShares California Muni Bond ETF | 2.74% | 2.94% | 2.78% | 2.29% | 1.91% | 1.58% | 1.80% | 2.03% | 2.17% | 2.09% | 2.21% | 2.55% |
EMLC VanEck J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 5.73% | 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 CMF have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMLC has higher volatility (1.88%) compared to CMF (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMLC dropped -32.43% vs CMF's -16.45%.
On 10-year performance, EMLC leads with 1.85% vs 1.55% for CMF. On fees, CMF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, CMF has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EMLC has performed better with a 1.85% return vs 1.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CMF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for EMLC.
EMLC has the higher dividend yield at 5.73%, compared with 2.74% for CMF.
EMLC is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while CMF is Municipal Bonds. EMLC tracks J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Core Index, while CMF tracks S&P California AMT-Free Municipal Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EMLC and 0.08% for CMF.
CMF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.26), 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 EMLC and CMF
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