ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE
ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and IS0Q.DE (iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds from iShares - ICGB.DE tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index while IS0Q.DE tracks the J.P. Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified Core Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ICGB.DE returned 3.74%/yr vs 2.56%/yr for IS0Q.DE. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ICGB.DE charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IS0Q.DE.
Performance
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICGB.DE achieves a 8.51% return, which is significantly higher than IS0Q.DE's 4.46% return.
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 7.11%
- YTD
- 8.51%
- 1Y
- 9.27%
- 3Y*
- 5.17%
- 5Y*
- 3.74%
- 10Y*
- —
IS0Q.DE
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 1.14%
- 6M
- 3.15%
- YTD
- 4.46%
- 1Y
- 7.53%
- 3Y*
- 6.23%
- 5Y*
- 2.56%
- 10Y*
- 3.13%
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 8.51% | -7.16% | 11.36% | -2.27% | 1.10% | 17.31% | 0.08% | -10.15% |
IS0Q.DE iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 4.46% | -3.70% | 12.34% | 4.23% | -6.55% | 7.84% | -2.78% | 3.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICGB.DE and IS0Q.DE is 0.77, 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 | 0.77 |
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 Jul 24, 2019 | 0.61 |
The correlation between ICGB.DE and IS0Q.DE shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (all time) to 0.77 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. IS0Q.DE — Risk / Return Rank
ICGB.DE
IS0Q.DE
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.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 iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IS0Q.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 | IS0Q.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.25 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.33 | 2.50 | +0.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.75 | 7.13 | +1.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICGB.DE drawdown since its inception was -13.36%, smaller than the maximum IS0Q.DE drawdown of -26.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICGB.DE and IS0Q.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICGB.DE | IS0Q.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -26.03% | +12.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.77% | -2.99% | +0.22% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.17% | -11.02% | -0.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.36% | -11.02% | -2.34% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -23.18% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.22% | -2.24% | +1.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.40% | -7.55% | +1.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.06% | 1.05% | +0.01% |
Volatility
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) is 1.31%, while iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IS0Q.DE) has a volatility of 1.51%. This indicates that ICGB.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IS0Q.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICGB.DE | IS0Q.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.31% | 1.51% | -0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.60% | 3.60% | 0.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.40% | 5.49% | -0.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.63% | 7.04% | -0.41% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.90% | 8.77% | -0.87% |
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICGB.DE has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than IS0Q.DE's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICGB.DE vs. IS0Q.DE - Dividend Comparison
ICGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, less than IS0Q.DE's 5.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IS0Q.DE iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.51% | 5.61% | 5.36% | 5.07% | 4.31% | 3.54% | 4.14% | 4.58% | 4.69% | 4.55% | 4.51% | 5.13% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICGB.DE and IS0Q.DE have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICGB.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICGB.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IS0Q.DE.
ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index, while IS0Q.DE tracks J.P. Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified Core Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ICGB.DE and 0.50% for IS0Q.DE.
Find the right allocation for ICGB.DE and IS0Q.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