PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
INVG vs. CEMB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

INVG vs. CEMB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, INVG achieves a 0.96% return, which is significantly lower than CEMB's 1.38% return.


INVG

1D
0.16%
1M
0.87%
YTD
0.96%
6M
1.01%
1Y
5.23%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CEMB

1D
-0.24%
1M
0.37%
YTD
1.38%
6M
1.67%
1Y
6.25%
3Y*
7.04%
5Y*
1.87%
10Y*
3.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

INVG vs. CEMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between INVG and CEMB is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025

0.77

The correlation between INVG and CEMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 - 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

INVG vs. CEMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

INVG
INVG Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
INVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
INVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
INVG Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
INVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
INVG Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

CEMB
CEMB Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
CEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
CEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
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.

INVG vs. CEMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB). 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.


INVGCEMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.39

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.67

2.18

-0.51

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.31

9.37

-4.06

INVG vs. CEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current INVG Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the CEMB Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of INVG and CEMB, 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...

Drawdowns

INVG vs. CEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INVG drawdown since its inception was -3.15%, smaller than the maximum CEMB drawdown of -20.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INVG and CEMB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


INVGCEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.15%

-20.84%

+17.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.15%

-2.88%

-0.27%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.61%

-0.46%

-0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.71%

-3.64%

+2.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

0.67%

+0.32%

Volatility

INVG vs. CEMB - Volatility Comparison

GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) has a higher volatility of 1.26% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB) at 1.03%. This indicates that INVG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


INVGCEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.26%

1.03%

+0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.41%

2.52%

+0.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

3.13%

+1.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.45%

5.63%

-1.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.45%

6.29%

-1.84%

INVG vs. CEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

INVG has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CEMB's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

INVG vs. CEMB - Dividend Comparison

INVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.66%, less than CEMB's 5.14% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF
5.14%5.14%5.11%4.77%4.29%3.51%3.86%4.19%4.66%4.06%4.26%4.76%
INVG
GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF
4.66%2.81%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


INVG and CEMB have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

INVG has higher volatility (1.26%) compared to CEMB (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, INVG dropped -3.15% vs CEMB's -20.84%.

On 1-year performance, CEMB leads with 6.25% vs 5.23% for INVG. On fees, INVG is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CEMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CEMB has performed better with a 6.25% return vs 5.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

INVG is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CEMB.

CEMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.14%, compared with 4.66% for INVG.

They also come from different issuers: GMO and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for INVG and 0.50% for CEMB.

CEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.18), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for INVG and CEMB

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