EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L
EMLP.L (PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc) and CYGB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - EMLP.L tracks the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD while CYGB.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 5.44%/yr for CYGB.L. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMLP.L charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CYGB.L.
Performance
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.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 CYGB.L's 3.55% 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%
CYGB.L
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- 6M
- 3.19%
- YTD
- 3.55%
- 1Y
- 3.60%
- 3Y*
- 6.74%
- 5Y*
- 5.44%
- 10Y*
- —
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc | 3.11% | 9.09% | -1.67% | 7.52% | 5.55% | 1.05% |
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 3.55% | 2.20% | 11.38% | 7.14% | 2.11% | 2.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMLP.L and CYGB.L is -0.03, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2021 | 0.02 |
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. CYGB.L — Risk / Return Rank
EMLP.L
CYGB.L
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.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 GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.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 | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.28 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | 5.18 | -3.19 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.51 | 11.91 | -6.41 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMLP.L drawdown since its inception was -53.09%, which is greater than CYGB.L's maximum drawdown of -1.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMLP.L and CYGB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMLP.L | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.09% | -1.56% | -51.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.29% | -0.69% | -3.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.90% | -1.56% | -3.34% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.24% | -1.56% | -9.68% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.11% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.82% | 0.00% | -13.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -27.91% | -0.24% | -27.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.55% | 0.30% | +1.25% |
Volatility
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L - Volatility Comparison
PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L) has a higher volatility of 1.25% compared to iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.L) at 0.59%. This indicates that EMLP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CYGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMLP.L | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.25% | 0.59% | +0.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.22% | 2.22% | +2.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.44% | 2.71% | +2.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.07% | 2.37% | +5.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.18% | 2.33% | +6.85% |
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMLP.L has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is higher than CYGB.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMLP.L vs. CYGB.L - Dividend Comparison
EMLP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CYGB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 1.70% | 1.84% | 2.13% | 2.38% | 2.68% | 2.21% |
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMLP.L and CYGB.L have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CYGB.L is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CYGB.L is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLP.L.
EMLP.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD, while CYGB.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 0.40% for CYGB.L.
Find the right allocation for EMLP.L and CYGB.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