ICSH vs. EMLC
ICSH (iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF) and EMLC (VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICSH is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares, while EMLC is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index Emerging Markets Global Core Index. ICSH is actively managed, while EMLC is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ICSH returned 2.77%/yr vs 1.99%/yr for EMLC. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ICSH charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for EMLC.
Performance
ICSH vs. EMLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICSH achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly higher than EMLC's -0.23% return. Over the past 10 years, ICSH has outperformed EMLC with an annualized return of 2.77%, while EMLC has yielded a comparatively lower 1.99% annualized return.
ICSH
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.18%
- YTD
- 1.43%
- 6M
- 1.75%
- 1Y
- 4.30%
- 3Y*
- 5.15%
- 5Y*
- 3.67%
- 10Y*
- 2.77%
EMLC
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- -1.80%
- YTD
- -0.23%
- 6M
- 1.29%
- 1Y
- 7.90%
- 3Y*
- 6.04%
- 5Y*
- 0.97%
- 10Y*
- 1.99%
ICSH vs. EMLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICSH iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 1.43% | 4.96% | 5.52% | 5.58% | 0.97% | 0.16% | 1.61% | 3.17% | 2.25% | 1.63% |
EMLC VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | -0.23% | 18.81% | -2.97% | 11.18% | -10.58% | -9.72% | 3.08% | 9.79% | -7.57% | 13.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICSH and EMLC is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2013 | 0.15 |
The correlation between ICSH and EMLC shifts across timeframes, from 0.15 (all time) to 0.30 (3 years), 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
ICSH vs. EMLC — Risk / Return Rank
ICSH
EMLC
ICSH vs. EMLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF (ICSH) and VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC). 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.
| ICSH | EMLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +9.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +25.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 6.56 | 1.22 | +5.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 43.67 | 1.28 | +42.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 288.81 | 4.34 | +284.47 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ICSH | EMLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.01 | 1.14 | +9.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 7.62 | 0.11 | +7.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 2.63 | 0.20 | +2.43 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.93 | 0.10 | +1.83 |
Drawdowns
ICSH vs. EMLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICSH drawdown since its inception was -3.94%, smaller than the maximum EMLC drawdown of -32.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICSH and EMLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICSH | EMLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.94% | -32.43% | +28.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.10% | -6.19% | +6.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.10% | -9.15% | +9.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.73% | -25.26% | +24.53% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -3.94% | -26.47% | +22.53% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -5.38% | +5.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.08% | -14.36% | +14.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 1.82% | -1.81% |
Volatility
ICSH vs. EMLC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF (ICSH) is 0.15%, while VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (EMLC) has a volatility of 2.20%. This indicates that ICSH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICSH | EMLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.15% | 2.20% | -2.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.30% | 6.08% | -5.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39% | 7.00% | -6.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.48% | 9.13% | -8.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.06% | 10.05% | -8.99% |
ICSH vs. EMLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICSH has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLC's 0.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICSH vs. EMLC - Dividend Comparison
ICSH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.34%, less than EMLC's 6.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLC VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 6.26% | 5.91% | 6.55% | 5.97% | 5.54% | 5.25% | 4.90% | 6.25% | 6.50% | 5.34% | 5.32% | 6.25% |
ICSH iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 4.34% | 4.55% | 5.24% | 4.78% | 1.66% | 0.42% | 1.21% | 2.61% | 2.20% | 1.36% | 0.88% | 0.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICSH and EMLC have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMLC has higher volatility (2.20%) compared to ICSH (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICSH dropped -3.94% vs EMLC's -32.43%.
On 10-year performance, ICSH leads with 2.77% vs 1.99% for EMLC. On fees, ICSH is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, ICSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, ICSH has performed better with a 2.77% return vs 1.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ICSH is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for EMLC.
EMLC has the higher dividend yield at 6.26%, compared with 4.34% for ICSH.
ICSH is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while EMLC is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for ICSH and 0.30% for EMLC.
ICSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.01 vs 1.14), 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.
Find the right allocation for ICSH and EMLC
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