IBHK vs. HYEM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBHK (iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF) and HYEM (VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF) are both High Yield Bonds funds - IBHK tracks the Bloomberg 2031 Term High Yield and Income Index while HYEM tracks the BofA Merrill Lynch Diversified High Yield US Emerging Markets Corporate Plus Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBHK returned 7.25% vs 10.30% for HYEM. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBHK charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for HYEM.

Performance

IBHK vs. HYEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHK) and VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF (HYEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBHK achieves a 1.66% return, which is significantly lower than HYEM's 3.92% return.

IBHK

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 0.51%
• YTD: 1.66%
• 6M: 2.12%
• 1Y: 7.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HYEM

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 3.92%
• 6M: 4.87%
• 1Y: 10.30%
• 3Y*: 11.00%
• 5Y*: 3.04%
• 10Y*: 4.65%

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

IBHK vs. HYEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBHK iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF	1.66%	9.05%	5.05%
HYEM VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF	3.92%	9.24%	6.19%

Correlation

The correlation between IBHK and HYEM is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2024	0.47

Return for Risk

IBHK vs. HYEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBHK

IBHK Risk / Return Rank: 57
IBHK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
IBHK Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
IBHK Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IBHK Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
IBHK Martin Ratio Rank: 63

HYEM

HYEM Risk / Return Rank: 76
HYEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
HYEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
HYEM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
HYEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
HYEM Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

IBHK vs. HYEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHK) and VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF (HYEM). 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.

	IBHK	HYEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.39	-0.59
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	3.50	-0.78
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.47	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.58	3.79	-1.22
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.36	15.48	-4.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBHK vs. HYEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBHK Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the HYEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBHK and HYEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBHK	HYEM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	2.39	-0.59
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.41	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.50	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.54	0.54	+1.00

Drawdowns

IBHK vs. HYEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBHK drawdown since its inception was -4.83%, smaller than the maximum HYEM drawdown of -30.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBHK and HYEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBHK	HYEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.83%	-30.96%	+26.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.82%	-2.73%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.23%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.30%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.10%	-0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.49%	-4.40%	+3.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.64%	0.67%	-0.03%

Volatility

IBHK vs. HYEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHK) is 1.26%, while VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF (HYEM) has a volatility of 1.33%. This indicates that IBHK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HYEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBHK	HYEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.26%	1.33%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.19%	3.24%	-0.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.06%	4.33%	-0.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.12%	7.49%	-2.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.12%	9.27%	-4.15%

IBHK vs. HYEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBHK has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than HYEM's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBHK vs. HYEM - Dividend Comparison

IBHK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.48%, which matches HYEM's 6.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HYEM VanEck Vectors Emerging Markets High Yield Bond ETF	6.52%	6.67%	6.34%	6.27%	6.47%	5.33%	5.56%	6.14%	5.71%	5.86%	6.25%	7.64%
IBHK iShares iBonds 2031 Term High Yield and Income ETF	6.48%	6.52%	4.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBHK and HYEM in my portfolio?

IBHK and HYEM have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBHK or HYEM?

HYEM has higher volatility (1.33%) compared to IBHK (1.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBHK dropped -4.83% vs HYEM's -30.96%.

Which ETF is better, IBHK or HYEM?

On 1-year performance, HYEM leads with 10.30% vs 7.25% for IBHK. On fees, IBHK is cheaper at 0.35% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBHK or HYEM?

Over the 1-year period, HYEM has performed better with a 10.30% return vs 7.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBHK or HYEM?

IBHK is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for HYEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBHK or HYEM?

HYEM has the higher dividend yield at 6.52%, compared with 6.48% for IBHK.

What is the main difference between IBHK and HYEM?

IBHK tracks Bloomberg 2031 Term High Yield and Income Index, while HYEM tracks BofA Merrill Lynch Diversified High Yield US Emerging Markets Corporate Plus Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for IBHK and 0.40% for HYEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HYEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.79), 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.