IEML.L vs. EMLP.L
IEML.L (iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) and EMLP.L (PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - IEML.L tracks the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified 10% Cap 1% Floor Index while EMLP.L tracks the JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IEML.L returned 1.98%/yr vs 3.40%/yr for EMLP.L. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IEML.L charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for EMLP.L.
Performance
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
IEML.L is traded in USD, while EMLP.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the EMLP.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IEML.L achieves a 0.25% return, which is significantly lower than EMLP.L's 1.54% return. Over the past 10 years, IEML.L has underperformed EMLP.L with an annualized return of 1.98%, while EMLP.L has yielded a comparatively higher 3.40% annualized return.
IEML.L
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.39%
- YTD
- 0.25%
- 6M
- 0.34%
- 1Y
- 7.04%
- 3Y*
- 6.42%
- 5Y*
- 1.29%
- 10Y*
- 1.98%
EMLP.L
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.52%
- YTD
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 1.94%
- 1Y
- 7.80%
- 3Y*
- 5.82%
- 5Y*
- 3.56%
- 10Y*
- 3.40%
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IEML.L iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 0.25% | 18.29% | -2.61% | 11.29% | -10.82% | -10.44% | 1.80% | 11.74% | -7.21% | 13.67% |
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc | 1.54% | 17.33% | -3.31% | 13.19% | -5.73% | -5.19% | 1.46% | 13.96% | -7.04% | 12.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between IEML.L and EMLP.L is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.61 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2011 | 0.68 |
The correlation between IEML.L and EMLP.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (5 years) to 0.68 (all time), 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
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L — Risk / Return Rank
IEML.L
EMLP.L
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEML.L) and PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.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.
| IEML.L | EMLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.22 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.12 | 1.34 | -0.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.62 | 4.32 | -0.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IEML.L drawdown since its inception was -36.66%, smaller than the maximum EMLP.L drawdown of -54.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEML.L and EMLP.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IEML.L | EMLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.66% | -54.49% | +17.83% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.28% | -5.82% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.04% | -7.37% | -1.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.01% | -19.19% | -5.82% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.17% | -20.62% | -7.55% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.97% | -26.66% | +16.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.01% | -36.34% | +17.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.94% | 1.80% | +0.14% |
Volatility
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (IEML.L) has a higher volatility of 2.47% compared to PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF Acc (EMLP.L) at 1.93%. This indicates that IEML.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMLP.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IEML.L | EMLP.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 1.93% | +0.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.11% | 5.41% | +1.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.99% | 6.54% | +1.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.25% | 9.07% | +0.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.04% | 9.20% | +0.84% |
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IEML.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EMLP.L's 0.61% expense ratio.
Dividends
IEML.L vs. EMLP.L - Dividend Comparison
IEML.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.88%, while EMLP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMLP.L PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Bond Index UCITS ETF 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% |
IEML.L iShares J.P. Morgan Emerging Markets Local Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 6.88% | 5.16% | 5.69% | 5.02% | 5.54% | 4.67% | 4.83% | 5.24% | 5.71% | 4.99% | 5.50% | 3.49% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IEML.L and EMLP.L have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IEML.L is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IEML.L is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.61% for EMLP.L.
IEML.L tracks J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global Diversified 10% Cap 1% Floor Index, while EMLP.L tracks JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified TR USD. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IEML.L and 0.61% for EMLP.L.
Find the right allocation for IEML.L and EMLP.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