PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEMB.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMGA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEMB.L achieves a 1.62% return, which is significantly higher than EMGA.L's 0.79% return.


IEMB.L

1D
0.41%
1M
1.01%
YTD
1.62%
6M
2.22%
1Y
11.20%
3Y*
9.72%
5Y*
1.91%
10Y*
3.32%

EMGA.L

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.75%
YTD
0.79%
6M
1.63%
1Y
8.91%
3Y*
7.03%
5Y*
1.03%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
IEMB.L
iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
1.62%13.71%5.70%10.54%-18.35%-2.28%5.57%16.06%-0.68%
EMGA.L
iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.79%18.25%-2.74%11.65%-10.95%-10.50%1.84%11.71%-2.92%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMB.L and EMGA.L is 0.61, 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

0.61

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.59

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2018

0.60

The correlation between IEMB.L and EMGA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.61 - 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

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEMB.L
IEMB.L Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
IEMB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

EMGA.L
EMGA.L Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
EMGA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMGA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMGA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
EMGA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMGA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.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 Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMGA.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.


IEMB.LEMGA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.70

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.23

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

1.50

+1.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.73

5.01

+5.72

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMB.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is higher than the EMGA.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMB.L and EMGA.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IEMB.LEMGA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.88

1.19

+0.70

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.21

0.11

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

0.16

+0.34

Drawdowns

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMB.L drawdown since its inception was -32.08%, which is greater than EMGA.L's maximum drawdown of -28.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMB.L and EMGA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IEMB.LEMGA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.08%

-28.18%

-3.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.32%

-5.93%

+1.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.54%

-9.12%

+1.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.62%

-26.60%

-2.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.11%

-2.52%

+2.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.02%

-8.98%

+3.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.04%

1.78%

-0.74%

Volatility

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares J.P. Morgan USD EM Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEMB.L) and iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMGA.L) have volatilities of 2.57% and 2.63%, 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.LEMGA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.57%

2.63%

-0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.93%

6.52%

-1.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.95%

7.49%

-1.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.87%

9.03%

-0.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.25%

10.24%

-0.99%

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMB.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EMGA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

IEMB.L vs. EMGA.L - Dividend Comparison

IEMB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.83%, while EMGA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMGA.L
iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government 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)
5.83%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 EMGA.L have a correlation of 0.61, 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 EMGA.L.

Their fees differ too: 0.45% for IEMB.L and 0.50% for EMGA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IEMB.L and EMGA.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