PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Dist (EMLI.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMSA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with EMLI.L having a 1.64% return and EMSA.L slightly lower at 1.61%.


EMLI.L

1D
-0.27%
1M
-0.41%
YTD
1.64%
6M
1.64%
1Y
8.36%
3Y*
6.38%
5Y*
3.30%
10Y*
3.23%

EMSA.L

1D
0.20%
1M
1.06%
YTD
1.61%
6M
2.19%
1Y
10.63%
3Y*
9.08%
5Y*
1.36%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
EMLI.L
PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Dist
1.64%16.62%-3.24%13.68%-5.61%-5.52%1.92%13.04%3.08%
EMSA.L
iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
1.61%13.11%5.32%9.71%-18.78%-3.11%6.03%15.79%-0.63%

Correlation

The correlation between EMLI.L and EMSA.L is 0.54, 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

0.54

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

0.54

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

0.52

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2018

0.52

The correlation between EMLI.L and EMSA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.54 - 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

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMLI.L
EMLI.L Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
EMLI.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMLI.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMLI.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
EMLI.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMLI.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

EMSA.L
EMSA.L Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
EMSA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMSA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMSA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
EMSA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMSA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
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.

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Dist (EMLI.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMSA.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.


EMLI.LEMSA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.37

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.47

2.47

-1.00

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.23

10.09

-4.86

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMLI.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is lower than the EMSA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMLI.L and EMSA.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMLI.LEMSA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.29

1.93

-0.64

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.33

0.16

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.23

0.33

-0.10

Drawdowns

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMLI.L drawdown since its inception was -25.62%, smaller than the maximum EMSA.L drawdown of -29.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLI.L and EMSA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EMLI.LEMSA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.62%

-29.12%

+3.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.67%

-4.29%

-1.38%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.82%

-7.28%

-0.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.52%

-28.91%

+9.39%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-21.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.80%

-0.22%

-2.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.31%

-8.06%

+0.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.59%

1.05%

+0.54%

Volatility

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Dist (EMLI.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMSA.L) have volatilities of 2.02% and 2.09%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EMLI.LEMSA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.02%

2.09%

-0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.40%

4.47%

+0.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.49%

5.49%

+1.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.89%

8.46%

+1.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.59%

9.76%

-0.17%

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMLI.L has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than EMSA.L's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

EMLI.L vs. EMSA.L - Dividend Comparison

EMLI.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.55%, while EMSA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMLI.L
PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Dist
6.55%5.81%6.33%5.70%5.21%4.50%3.68%5.24%5.83%5.76%6.69%7.09%
EMSA.L
iShares J.P. Morgan ESG USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EMLI.L and EMSA.L have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

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

EMSA.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLI.L.

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

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EMLI.L and EMSA.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