JEMB vs. EBND

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JEMB (Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) and EBND (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. JEMB is actively managed, while EBND is passively managed. Over the past year, JEMB returned 13.60% vs 5.78% for EBND. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. JEMB charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for EBND.

Performance

JEMB vs. EBND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (JEMB) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JEMB achieves a 2.48% return, which is significantly higher than EBND's -0.23% return.

JEMB

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 2.48%
• 6M: 3.37%
• 1Y: 13.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EBND

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: -0.23%
• 6M: 0.63%
• 1Y: 5.78%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: 0.03%
• 10Y*: 1.72%

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

JEMB vs. EBND - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JEMB Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	2.48%	14.63%	1.79%
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF	-0.23%	15.83%	-3.42%

Correlation

The correlation between JEMB and EBND is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2024	0.38

Return for Risk

JEMB vs. EBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

JEMB

JEMB Risk / Return Rank: 57
JEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
JEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
JEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 56
JEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
JEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 66

EBND

EBND Risk / Return Rank: 23
EBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
EBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
EBND Omega Ratio Rank: 23
EBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
EBND Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

JEMB vs. EBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (JEMB) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND). 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.

	JEMB	EBND	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	0.84	+0.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.46	1.21	+1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.16	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.92	0.88	+2.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.01	2.93	+9.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JEMB vs. EBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JEMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is higher than the EBND Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JEMB and EBND, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JEMB	EBND	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.71	0.84	+0.87
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.23	0.10	+1.13

Drawdowns

JEMB vs. EBND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JEMB drawdown since its inception was -5.37%, smaller than the maximum EBND drawdown of -29.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JEMB and EBND.

Drawdown Indicators

	JEMB	EBND	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.37%	-29.51%	+24.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.67%	-6.63%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.25%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.57%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-29.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.66%	-3.24%	+2.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.01%	-10.87%	+9.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.14%	1.98%	-0.84%

Volatility

JEMB vs. EBND - Volatility Comparison

Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (JEMB) has a higher volatility of 2.49% compared to SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF (EBND) at 2.35%. This indicates that JEMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EBND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JEMB	EBND	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.49%	2.35%	+0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.37%	5.94%	+0.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.99%	6.92%	+1.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.52%	8.98%	-0.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.52%	9.19%	-0.67%

JEMB vs. EBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

JEMB has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than EBND's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

JEMB vs. EBND - Dividend Comparison

JEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.29%, more than EBND's 5.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EBND SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond ETF	5.83%	5.54%	5.89%	5.26%	4.75%	3.83%	3.67%	4.68%	4.70%	2.00%
JEMB Janus Henderson Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	6.29%	6.19%	2.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JEMB and EBND in my portfolio?

JEMB and EBND have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JEMB or EBND?

JEMB has higher volatility (2.49%) compared to EBND (2.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JEMB dropped -5.37% vs EBND's -29.51%.

Which ETF is better, JEMB or EBND?

On 1-year performance, JEMB leads with 13.60% vs 5.78% for EBND. On fees, EBND is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EBND has been the lower-risk option at 2.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JEMB or EBND?

Over the 1-year period, JEMB has performed better with a 13.60% return vs 5.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JEMB or EBND?

EBND is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for JEMB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JEMB or EBND?

JEMB has the higher dividend yield at 6.29%, compared with 5.83% for EBND.

What is the main difference between JEMB and EBND?

They also come from different issuers: Janus Henderson and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for JEMB and 0.30% for EBND.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 0.84), 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.