EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

EMUS.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and LDGL.L (L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing) are both exchange-traded funds - EMUS.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while LDGL.L is a Global Equity Income fund tracking the FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMUS.L charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for LDGL.L.

Performance

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) and L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LDGL.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

EMUS.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.23%
• 6M: -1.57%
• YTD: -1.57%
• 1Y: 2.64%
• 3Y*: 5.25%
• 5Y*: 1.05%
• 10Y*: —

LDGL.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.54%
• 6M: 11.10%
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	-1.79%
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing	12.26%

Correlation

The correlation between EMUS.L and LDGL.L is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2026	0.44

Return for Risk

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMUS.L

EMUS.L Risk / Return Rank: 19
EMUS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
EMUS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
EMUS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EMUS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
EMUS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 18

LDGL.L

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (EMUS.L) and L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing (LDGL.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.

	EMUS.L	LDGL.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.58	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.52	—	—

Drawdowns

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMUS.L drawdown since its inception was -19.58%, which is greater than LDGL.L's maximum drawdown of -9.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMUS.L and LDGL.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMUS.L	LDGL.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.58%	-9.46%	-10.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.59%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.59%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.90%	0.00%	-1.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.63%	-2.37%	-3.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.73%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	EMUS.L	LDGL.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.14%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.56%	14.29%	-9.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.30%	14.29%	-8.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.30%	14.29%	-8.99%

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMUS.L has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than LDGL.L's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMUS.L vs. LDGL.L - Dividend Comparison

EMUS.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.81%, more than LDGL.L's 1.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMUS.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Dist)	2.81%	5.39%	4.96%	4.62%	3.79%	1.17%
LDGL.L L&G Global Quality Dividends UCITS ETF USD Distributing	1.60%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMUS.L and LDGL.L in my portfolio?

EMUS.L and LDGL.L have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EMUS.L or LDGL.L?

On fees, LDGL.L is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMUS.L or LDGL.L?

LDGL.L is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EMUS.L.

What is the main difference between EMUS.L and LDGL.L?

EMUS.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while LDGL.L is Global Equity Income. EMUS.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index, while LDGL.L tracks FTSE Developed All Cap Dividend Growth with Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EMUS.L and 0.29% for LDGL.L.