PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEMB vs. EMHC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEMB vs. EMHC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB) and SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEMB achieves a 0.60% return, which is significantly lower than EMHC's 1.57% return.


FEMB

1D
-0.81%
1M
0.57%
YTD
0.60%
6M
0.88%
1Y
10.20%
3Y*
7.79%
5Y*
1.63%
10Y*
2.51%

EMHC

1D
-0.32%
1M
1.13%
YTD
1.57%
6M
1.74%
1Y
11.54%
3Y*
8.74%
5Y*
1.55%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMB vs. EMHC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FEMB
First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF
0.60%21.77%-5.61%17.12%-10.50%-6.76%
EMHC
SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF
1.57%14.07%3.52%10.06%-17.75%1.68%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMB and EMHC 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

0.53

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

0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2021

0.55

The correlation between FEMB and EMHC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.55 - 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

FEMB vs. EMHC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEMB
FEMB Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
FEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
FEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

EMHC
EMHC Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
EMHC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMHC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMHC Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
EMHC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMHC Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

FEMB vs. EMHC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB) and SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). 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.


FEMBEMHCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.41

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

2.65

-1.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.34

11.09

-6.75

FEMB vs. EMHC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the EMHC Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMB and EMHC, 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


FEMBEMHCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.22

2.14

-0.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

0.17

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.09

0.22

-0.13

Drawdowns

FEMB vs. EMHC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.44%, which is greater than EMHC's maximum drawdown of -28.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMB and EMHC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEMBEMHCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.44%

-28.03%

-2.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.58%

-4.37%

-3.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.13%

-7.67%

-2.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.85%

-28.03%

+0.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.91%

-0.32%

-3.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.93%

-9.91%

-0.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.35%

1.04%

+1.31%

Volatility

FEMB vs. EMHC - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB) has a higher volatility of 3.05% compared to SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC) at 1.89%. This indicates that FEMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMHC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEMBEMHCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.05%

1.89%

+1.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.57%

4.16%

+2.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.36%

5.43%

+2.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.26%

9.06%

+1.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.99%

8.96%

+2.03%

FEMB vs. EMHC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than EMHC's 0.23% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEMB vs. EMHC - Dividend Comparison

FEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.06%, which matches EMHC's 6.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMHC
SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF
6.11%6.16%5.95%5.12%5.11%2.97%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FEMB
First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF
6.06%5.67%6.09%5.15%6.35%6.12%5.29%5.40%5.86%6.38%5.83%4.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEMB and EMHC 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.

FEMB has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to EMHC (1.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEMB dropped -30.44% vs EMHC's -28.03%.

On 5-year performance, FEMB leads with 1.63% vs 1.55% for EMHC. On fees, EMHC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, EMHC has been the lower-risk option at 1.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FEMB has performed better with a 1.63% return vs 1.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMHC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FEMB.

EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.11%, compared with 6.06% for FEMB.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FEMB and 0.23% for EMHC.

EMHC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.22), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEMB and EMHC

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