IGF vs. EMB
IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) and EMB (iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while EMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IGF returned 8.40%/yr vs 3.33%/yr for EMB. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.39% expense ratio.
Performance
IGF vs. EMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IGF achieves a 9.67% return, which is significantly higher than EMB's 2.68% return. Over the past 10 years, IGF has outperformed EMB with an annualized return of 8.40%, while EMB has yielded a comparatively lower 3.33% annualized return.
IGF
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- -0.16%
- YTD
- 9.67%
- 6M
- 10.73%
- 1Y
- 18.46%
- 3Y*
- 15.62%
- 5Y*
- 10.85%
- 10Y*
- 8.40%
EMB
- 1D
- 0.47%
- 1M
- 2.07%
- YTD
- 2.68%
- 6M
- 2.69%
- 1Y
- 11.68%
- 3Y*
- 9.65%
- 5Y*
- 1.99%
- 10Y*
- 3.33%
IGF vs. EMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 9.67% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 6.14% | -1.26% | 11.57% | -6.50% | 25.82% | -9.95% | 19.31% |
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 2.68% | 13.85% | 5.54% | 10.62% | -18.63% | -2.23% | 5.42% | 15.48% | -5.47% | 10.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between IGF and EMB is 0.50, 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 | 0.50 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2007 | 0.44 |
The correlation between IGF and EMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.44 (all time) to 0.55 (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
IGF vs. EMB — Risk / Return Rank
IGF
EMB
IGF vs. EMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) and iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB). 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.
| IGF | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | 1.41 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.10 | 2.63 | +0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.83 | 11.23 | -2.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IGF vs. EMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IGF drawdown since its inception was -58.33%, which is greater than EMB's maximum drawdown of -34.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGF and EMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IGF | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.33% | -34.70% | -23.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.87% | -4.51% | -1.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.28% | -7.95% | -6.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -20.83% | -28.74% | +7.91% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.11% | -28.74% | -13.37% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.99% | 0.00% | -2.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.85% | -5.05% | -6.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | 1.06% | +1.00% |
Volatility
IGF vs. EMB - Volatility Comparison
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) has a higher volatility of 3.45% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMB) at 1.81%. This indicates that IGF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IGF | EMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.45% | 1.81% | +1.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.73% | 4.70% | +4.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.57% | 5.67% | +4.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.97% | 9.75% | +4.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.83% | 9.96% | +6.87% |
IGF vs. EMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both IGF and EMB have an expense ratio of 0.39%.
Dividends
IGF vs. EMB - Dividend Comparison
IGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.91%, less than EMB's 5.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMB iShares J.P. Morgan USD Emerging Markets Bond ETF | 5.01% | 4.98% | 5.46% | 4.74% | 5.04% | 3.89% | 3.88% | 4.51% | 5.64% | 4.54% | 4.83% | 4.84% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.91% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IGF and EMB have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IGF has higher volatility (3.45%) compared to EMB (1.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGF dropped -58.33% vs EMB's -34.70%.
On 10-year performance, IGF leads with 8.40% vs 3.33% for EMB. Both ETFs have the same 0.39% expense ratio. On volatility, EMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IGF has performed better with a 8.40% return vs 3.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGF and EMB have the same expense ratio: 0.39% per year.
EMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.01%, compared with 2.91% for IGF.
IGF is categorized as Industrials Equities, while EMB is Emerging Markets Bonds. IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net), while EMB tracks J.P. Morgan EMBI Global Core Index.
EMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.72), 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 IGF and EMB
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