ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE
ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and EMA5.DE (L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - ICGB.DE tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index while EMA5.DE tracks the J.P. Morgan ESG EMBI Global Diversified Short-Term Custom Maturity. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICGB.DE returned 3.70%/yr vs 3.31%/yr for EMA5.DE. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICGB.DE charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for EMA5.DE.
Performance
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICGB.DE achieves a 8.29% return, which is significantly higher than EMA5.DE's 3.09% return.
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.24%
- 6M
- 6.21%
- YTD
- 8.29%
- 1Y
- 8.81%
- 3Y*
- 5.26%
- 5Y*
- 3.70%
- 10Y*
- —
EMA5.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.09%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- YTD
- 3.09%
- 1Y
- 6.28%
- 3Y*
- 6.86%
- 5Y*
- 3.31%
- 10Y*
- —
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 8.29% | -7.16% | 11.36% | -2.27% | 1.10% | 17.31% | -0.77% |
EMA5.DE L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF | 3.09% | -2.08% | 14.60% | 4.24% | -4.92% | 8.07% | -0.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICGB.DE and EMA5.DE is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.65 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2020 | 0.65 |
The correlation between ICGB.DE and EMA5.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.67 - 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
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE — Risk / Return Rank
ICGB.DE
EMA5.DE
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) and L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF (EMA5.DE). 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.
| ICGB.DE | EMA5.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.17 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.17 | 2.20 | +0.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.39 | 5.73 | +2.66 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICGB.DE drawdown since its inception was -13.36%, which is greater than EMA5.DE's maximum drawdown of -10.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICGB.DE and EMA5.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICGB.DE | EMA5.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -10.01% | -3.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | -2.87% | +0.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.17% | -10.01% | -1.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.36% | -10.01% | -3.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.42% | -2.45% | +1.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.39% | -3.33% | -3.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.04% | 1.10% | -0.06% |
Volatility
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) is 1.06%, while L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF (EMA5.DE) has a volatility of 2.97%. This indicates that ICGB.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMA5.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICGB.DE | EMA5.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.06% | 2.97% | -1.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.58% | 5.43% | -1.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.32% | 6.74% | -1.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.63% | 7.21% | -0.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.89% | 7.05% | +0.84% |
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICGB.DE has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than EMA5.DE's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICGB.DE vs. EMA5.DE - Dividend Comparison
ICGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than EMA5.DE's 2.44% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMA5.DE L&G ESG Emerging Markets Government Bond (USD) 0-5 Year UCITS ETF | 2.44% | 6.10% | 5.86% | 4.63% | 3.06% | 1.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.68% | 1.92% | 2.22% | 2.58% | 2.80% | 2.71% | 2.63% | 0.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICGB.DE and EMA5.DE have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, EMA5.DE is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
EMA5.DE is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while EMA5.DE tracks J.P. Morgan ESG EMBI Global Diversified Short-Term Custom Maturity. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Legal & General. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ICGB.DE and 0.25% for EMA5.DE.
Find the right allocation for ICGB.DE and EMA5.DE
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