EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L
EMLP.L (PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc) and CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMLP.L tracks the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD while CNYB.L tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMLP.L returned 4.71%/yr vs 3.58%/yr for CNYB.L. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP.L charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNYB.L.
Performance
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMLP.L achieves a 3.11% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.08% return.
EMLP.L
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 0.06%
- 6M
- 2.44%
- YTD
- 3.11%
- 1Y
- 8.39%
- 3Y*
- 4.98%
- 5Y*
- 4.71%
- 10Y*
- 2.96%
CNYB.L
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- 6M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 5.08%
- 1Y
- 7.11%
- 3Y*
- 4.85%
- 5Y*
- 3.58%
- 10Y*
- —
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc | 3.11% | 9.09% | -1.67% | 7.52% | 5.55% | -4.33% | -1.55% | -3.06% |
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.08% | -2.20% | 6.65% | -4.09% | 6.21% | 9.69% | -19.80% | 0.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMLP.L and CNYB.L is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | 0.42 |
The correlation between EMLP.L and CNYB.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.42 to 0.50 - 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
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank
EMLP.L
CNYB.L
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.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 Acc (EMLP.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.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.
| EMLP.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.21 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | 2.57 | -0.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.51 | 6.13 | -0.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMLP.L drawdown since its inception was -53.09%, which is greater than CNYB.L's maximum drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP.L and CNYB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMLP.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.09% | -25.82% | -27.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.29% | -2.75% | -1.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.90% | -9.03% | +4.13% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.24% | -15.44% | +4.20% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.11% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.82% | -7.25% | -6.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -27.91% | -12.53% | -15.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.55% | 1.16% | +0.39% |
Volatility
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L) is 1.25%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) has a volatility of 1.68%. This indicates that EMLP.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMLP.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.25% | 1.68% | -0.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.22% | 4.69% | -0.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.44% | 6.29% | -0.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.07% | 7.66% | +0.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.18% | 11.48% | -2.30% |
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMLP.L has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMLP.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison
EMLP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CNYB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.72%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.72% | 1.89% | 2.24% | 2.55% | 2.72% | 2.74% | 2.65% | 0.72% |
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMLP.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CNYB.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CNYB.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLP.L.
EMLP.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.61% for EMLP.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.
Find the right allocation for EMLP.L and CNYB.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