EMLC vs. NEMD
EMLC (VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. EMLC is passively managed, while NEMD is actively managed. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMLC charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for NEMD.
Performance
EMLC vs. NEMD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMLC achieves a 0.92% return, which is significantly lower than NEMD's 3.76% return.
EMLC
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 1.06%
- YTD
- 0.92%
- 6M
- 1.94%
- 1Y
- 9.54%
- 3Y*
- 6.92%
- 5Y*
- 1.17%
- 10Y*
- 2.14%
NEMD
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 1.56%
- YTD
- 3.76%
- 6M
- 4.02%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EMLC vs. NEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EMLC VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 0.92% | 5.29% |
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 3.76% | 7.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMLC and NEMD is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 12, 2025 | 0.67 |
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. NEMD — Risk / Return Rank
EMLC
NEMD
EMLC vs. NEMD - 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 Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD). 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.
| EMLC | NEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.34 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMLC | NEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.39 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.13 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.11 | 2.14 | -2.03 |
Drawdowns
EMLC vs. NEMD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMLC drawdown since its inception was -32.43%, which is greater than NEMD's maximum drawdown of -4.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLC and NEMD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMLC | NEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.43% | -4.43% | -28.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.19% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.15% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.26% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -26.47% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.28% | -0.39% | -3.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.37% | -0.57% | -13.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.79% | — | — |
Volatility
EMLC vs. NEMD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMLC | NEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.21% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.99% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.90% | 6.51% | +0.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.13% | 6.51% | +2.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.05% | 6.51% | +3.54% |
EMLC vs. NEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMLC has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than NEMD's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMLC vs. NEMD - Dividend Comparison
EMLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.19%, more than NEMD's 4.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLC VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 6.19% | 5.91% | 6.55% | 5.97% | 5.54% | 5.25% | 4.90% | 6.25% | 6.50% | 5.34% | 5.32% | 6.25% |
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 4.73% | 2.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMLC and NEMD have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMLC is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMLC is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for NEMD.
EMLC has the higher dividend yield at 6.19%, compared with 4.73% for NEMD.
They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Neuberger Berman. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EMLC and 0.60% for NEMD.
Find the right allocation for EMLC and NEMD
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