IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L
IEMB.L (iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and EMCA.L (iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds from iShares. Over the past 5 years, IEMB.L returned 1.75%/yr vs 1.91%/yr for EMCA.L. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IEMB.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for EMCA.L.
Performance
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IEMB.L achieves a 1.65% return, which is significantly higher than EMCA.L's 1.55% return.
IEMB.L
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- -0.61%
- 6M
- 1.98%
- YTD
- 1.65%
- 1Y
- 10.02%
- 3Y*
- 8.70%
- 5Y*
- 1.75%
- 10Y*
- 2.92%
EMCA.L
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- -0.38%
- 6M
- 1.25%
- YTD
- 1.55%
- 1Y
- 5.99%
- 3Y*
- 6.97%
- 5Y*
- 1.91%
- 10Y*
- —
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEMB.L iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.65% | 13.71% | 5.70% | 10.54% | -18.35% | -2.28% | 5.57% | 16.06% | -1.19% |
EMCA.L iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 1.55% | 8.60% | 6.21% | 7.96% | -12.09% | -0.51% | 7.04% | 13.77% | 0.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between IEMB.L and EMCA.L is 0.53, 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 | 0.53 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 31, 2018 | 0.60 |
The correlation between IEMB.L and EMCA.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.64 (5 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
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L — Risk / Return Rank
IEMB.L
EMCA.L
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEMB.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMCA.L). 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.
| IEMB.L | EMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.29 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.31 | 2.63 | -0.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.59 | 10.19 | -0.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IEMB.L drawdown since its inception was -31.65%, which is greater than EMCA.L's maximum drawdown of -24.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMB.L and EMCA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IEMB.L | EMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.65% | -24.69% | -6.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.32% | -2.21% | -2.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.54% | -3.58% | -3.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.62% | -20.14% | -8.48% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.62% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.73% | -0.53% | -0.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.96% | -4.05% | -0.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.04% | 0.57% | +0.47% |
Volatility
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEMB.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMCA.L) have volatilities of 1.10% and 1.06%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IEMB.L | EMCA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.10% | 1.06% | +0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.03% | 3.26% | +1.77% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.89% | 3.82% | +2.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.89% | 5.25% | +3.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.24% | 8.79% | +0.45% |
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IEMB.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EMCA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
IEMB.L vs. EMCA.L - Dividend Comparison
IEMB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.77%, while EMCA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMCA.L iShares J.P. Morgan $ EM Corp Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IEMB.L iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.77% | 5.85% | 5.80% | 5.65% | 5.55% | 3.95% | 3.86% | 4.73% | 4.82% | 4.79% | 5.57% | 4.78% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IEMB.L and EMCA.L have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IEMB.L is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IEMB.L is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for EMCA.L.
Their fees differ too: 0.45% for IEMB.L and 0.50% for EMCA.L.
Find the right allocation for IEMB.L and EMCA.L
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