IMF vs. NEMD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IMF (Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF) and NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by Invesco, while NEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by Neuberger Berman. Both are actively managed. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IMF charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for NEMD.

Performance

IMF vs. NEMD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) and Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMF achieves a 11.36% return, which is significantly higher than NEMD's 3.64% return.

IMF

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: -2.28%
• YTD: 11.36%
• 6M: 11.56%
• 1Y: 20.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NEMD

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 1.16%
• YTD: 3.64%
• 6M: 3.74%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMF vs. NEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF	11.36%	6.69%
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	3.64%	7.10%

Correlation

The correlation between IMF and NEMD is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2025	0.11

Return for Risk

IMF vs. NEMD — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMF

IMF Risk / Return Rank: 73
IMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
IMF Omega Ratio Rank: 70
IMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IMF Martin Ratio Rank: 84

NEMD

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

IMF vs. NEMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF (IMF) and Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD). 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.

	IMF	NEMD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.95	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.65	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.14	—	—

Drawdowns

IMF vs. NEMD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMF drawdown since its inception was -15.29%, which is greater than NEMD's maximum drawdown of -4.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMF and NEMD.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMF	NEMD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.29%	-4.43%	-10.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.18%	-1.18%	-2.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.30%	-0.56%	-7.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IMF	NEMD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.58%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.20%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.43%	6.63%	+3.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.39%	6.63%	+5.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.39%	6.63%	+5.76%

IMF vs. NEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMF has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than NEMD's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMF vs. NEMD - Dividend Comparison

IMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than NEMD's 4.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
IMF Invesco Managed Futures Strategy ETF	0.91%	1.01%
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	4.73%	2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMF and NEMD in my portfolio?

IMF and NEMD have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IMF or NEMD?

On fees, NEMD is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMF or NEMD?

NEMD is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for IMF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMF or NEMD?

NEMD has the higher dividend yield at 4.73%, compared with 0.91% for IMF.

What is the main difference between IMF and NEMD?

IMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while NEMD is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Neuberger Berman. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for IMF and 0.60% for NEMD.