PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ITB vs. EEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ITB vs. EEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ITB achieves a -3.71% return, which is significantly lower than EEM's 20.18% return. Over the past 10 years, ITB has outperformed EEM with an annualized return of 13.61%, while EEM has yielded a comparatively lower 9.37% annualized return.


ITB

1D
-0.38%
1M
-0.48%
YTD
-3.71%
6M
-7.66%
1Y
3.31%
3Y*
6.44%
5Y*
6.84%
10Y*
13.61%

EEM

1D
1.80%
1M
-3.22%
YTD
20.18%
6M
22.10%
1Y
43.51%
3Y*
20.79%
5Y*
5.98%
10Y*
9.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ITB vs. EEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ITB
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF
-3.71%-5.26%2.06%68.91%-26.26%49.25%26.42%48.70%-30.92%59.65%
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
20.18%33.98%6.49%8.95%-20.56%-3.63%17.02%18.22%-15.31%37.26%

Correlation

The correlation between ITB and EEM is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.37

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

0.40

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

0.43

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2006

0.50

The correlation between ITB and EEM shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ITB vs. EEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ITB
EEM

Consumer Cyclical

71.8%
8.1%

Industrials

19.1%
6.2%

Basic Materials

8.6%
6.1%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.9%

Communication Services

-

5.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

2.7%

Energy

-

3.3%

Financial Services

-

17.5%

Healthcare

-

2.5%

Technology

-

43.6%

Utilities

-

2.0%

Consumer Cyclical

ITB
71.8%
EEM
8.1%

Industrials

ITB
19.1%
EEM
6.2%

Basic Materials

ITB
8.6%
EEM
6.1%

Real Estate

ITB
0.5%
EEM
0.9%

Communication Services

ITB

-

EEM
5.7%

Consumer Defensive

ITB

-

EEM
2.7%

Energy

ITB

-

EEM
3.3%

Financial Services

ITB

-

EEM
17.5%

Healthcare

ITB

-

EEM
2.5%

Technology

ITB

-

EEM
43.6%

Utilities

ITB

-

EEM
2.0%

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

ITB vs. EEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ITB
ITB Risk / Return Rank: 1111
Overall Rank
ITB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ITB Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
ITB Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
ITB Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
ITB Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank

EEM
EEM Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

ITB vs. EEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM). 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.


ITBEEMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.05

1.39

-0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.13

3.23

-3.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.25

12.20

-11.95

ITB vs. EEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ITB Sharpe Ratio is 0.11, which is lower than the EEM Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ITB and EEM, 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


ITBEEMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

2.07

-1.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

0.31

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

0.46

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.11

0.37

-0.26

Drawdowns

ITB vs. EEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ITB drawdown since its inception was -86.53%, which is greater than EEM's maximum drawdown of -66.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITB and EEM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ITBEEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-86.53%

-66.43%

-20.10%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.04%

-13.52%

-12.52%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-33.35%

-17.29%

-16.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-40.55%

-37.49%

-3.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.10%

-39.82%

-12.28%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-27.00%

-7.13%

-19.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-37.10%

-16.01%

-21.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.28%

3.58%

+9.70%

Volatility

ITB vs. EEM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) is 7.16%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) has a volatility of 10.60%. This indicates that ITB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ITBEEMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.16%

10.60%

-3.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.24%

18.87%

+1.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

29.41%

21.19%

+8.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.19%

19.16%

+10.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.00%

20.62%

+9.38%

ITB vs. EEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ITB has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is lower than EEM's 0.72% expense ratio.


Dividends

ITB vs. EEM - Dividend Comparison

ITB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than EEM's 1.85% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
1.85%2.22%2.43%2.63%2.50%1.99%1.45%2.76%2.24%1.89%1.89%2.49%
ITB
iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF
1.23%1.67%0.46%0.48%0.86%0.37%0.46%0.50%0.63%0.28%0.43%0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


ITB and EEM have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EEM has higher volatility (10.60%) compared to ITB (7.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITB dropped -86.53% vs EEM's -66.43%.

On 10-year performance, ITB leads with 13.61% vs 9.37% for EEM. On fees, ITB is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, ITB has been the lower-risk option at 7.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ITB has performed better with a 13.61% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ITB is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

EEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 1.23% for ITB.

ITB is categorized as Building & Construction, while EEM is Emerging Markets Diversified. ITB tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Home Construction Index, while EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net). Their fees differ too: 0.42% for ITB and 0.72% for EEM.

EEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 0.11), 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 ITB and EEM

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