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

Performance

FEMB vs. XEMD - 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 BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD). 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 XEMD's 2.75% 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%

XEMD

1D
-0.37%
1M
1.21%
YTD
2.75%
6M
3.27%
1Y
11.88%
3Y*
11.23%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMB vs. XEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FEMB
First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF
0.60%21.77%-5.61%17.12%1.41%
XEMD
BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF
2.75%13.98%8.77%10.26%1.82%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMB and XEMD is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.50

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

0.51

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2022

0.55

The correlation between FEMB and XEMD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 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. XEMD — 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

XEMD
XEMD Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
XEMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XEMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
XEMD Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
XEMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
XEMD Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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. XEMD - 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 BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD). 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.


FEMBXEMDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.51

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.35

3.39

-2.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.34

15.27

-10.93

FEMB vs. XEMD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.22, which is lower than the XEMD Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEMB and XEMD, 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


FEMBXEMDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.22

2.57

-1.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

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

1.39

-1.31

Drawdowns

FEMB vs. XEMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.44%, which is greater than XEMD's maximum drawdown of -10.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMB and XEMD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEMBXEMDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.44%

-10.01%

-20.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.58%

-3.52%

-4.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.13%

-4.31%

-5.82%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.85%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.91%

-0.37%

-3.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.93%

-1.26%

-8.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.35%

0.78%

+1.57%

Volatility

FEMB vs. XEMD - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF (FEMB) has a higher volatility of 3.05% compared to BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) at 1.43%. This indicates that FEMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XEMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEMBXEMDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.05%

1.43%

+1.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.57%

3.70%

+2.87%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.36%

4.66%

+3.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.26%

6.88%

+3.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.99%

6.88%

+4.11%

FEMB vs. XEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than XEMD's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEMB vs. XEMD - Dividend Comparison

FEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.06%, more than XEMD's 5.82% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XEMD
BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF
5.82%6.15%6.30%6.19%3.08%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEMB and XEMD have a correlation of 0.50, 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 XEMD (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEMB dropped -30.44% vs XEMD's -10.01%.

On 3-year performance, XEMD leads with 11.23% vs 7.79% for FEMB. On fees, XEMD is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, XEMD has been the lower-risk option at 1.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, XEMD has performed better with a 11.23% return vs 7.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XEMD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FEMB.

FEMB has the higher dividend yield at 6.06%, compared with 5.82% for XEMD.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FEMB and 0.29% for XEMD.

XEMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 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 XEMD

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