PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
LEMB vs. ACWI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

LEMB vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LEMB is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LEMB returned 1.37%/yr vs 12.85%/yr for ACWI. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LEMB charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

LEMB vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEMB achieves a 1.19% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.13% return. Over the past 10 years, LEMB has underperformed ACWI with an annualized return of 1.37%, while ACWI has yielded a comparatively higher 12.85% annualized return.

LEMB

1D
-0.57%
1M
1.13%
YTD
1.19%
6M
2.18%
1Y
9.81%
3Y*
6.09%
5Y*
0.59%
10Y*
1.37%

ACWI

1D
-0.83%
1M
5.28%
YTD
12.13%
6M
12.96%
1Y
29.18%
3Y*
21.15%
5Y*
11.28%
10Y*
12.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LEMB vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF		1.19%18.02%-1.72%7.23%-10.74%-9.92%3.10%6.40%-7.49%12.49%
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF		12.13%22.41%17.45%22.27%-18.39%18.66%16.34%26.59%-9.19%24.33%

Correlation

The correlation between LEMB and ACWI is 0.60, 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

0.60

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

0.50

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

0.54

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

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2011

0.52

The correlation between LEMB and ACWI shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (3 years) to 0.60 (1 year), 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.

iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF

iShares MSCI ACWI ETF

Often compared with LEMB:
LEMB vs. EMLCLEMB vs. EMBLEMB vs. EBNDLEMB vs. VWOBLEMB vs. PFUIXLEMB vs. PELBXLEMB vs. FLOT
Often compared with ACWI:
ACWI vs. VTACWI vs. SPYACWI vs. VWRL.LACWI vs. ACWXACWI vs. ACWI.LACWI vs. VOOACWI vs. VTI

Return for Risk

LEMB vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
LEMB
LEMB Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
LEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
LEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
ACWI
ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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.

LEMB vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.

LEMBACWIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.51
2.29

-0.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.10
3.17

-1.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.41

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.64

3.01

-1.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.58

13.53

-7.94

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LEMB vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is lower than the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEMB and ACWI, 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

LEMBACWIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.51

2.29

-0.78

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

0.71

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

0.75

-0.61

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.05

0.43

-0.38

Drawdowns

LEMB vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.82%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEMB and ACWI.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LEMBACWIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.82%

-56.00%

+25.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.00%

-9.73%

+3.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.09%

-16.55%

+6.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.29%

-26.42%

+1.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.09%

-33.53%

+4.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.87%

-0.83%

-4.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.74%

-8.61%

-4.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.76%

2.16%

-0.40%

Volatility

LEMB vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) is 2.09%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that LEMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

LEMBACWIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.09%

3.93%

-1.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.34%

10.29%

-4.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.54%

12.78%

-6.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.24%

16.05%

-7.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.29%

17.11%

-7.82%

LEMB vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEMB has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEMB vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

LEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, more than ACWI's 1.38% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ACWI
iShares MSCI ACWI ETF		1.38%1.55%1.70%1.88%1.79%1.71%1.43%2.33%2.18%1.94%2.19%2.56%
LEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF		2.41%2.44%0.00%1.34%0.86%3.89%0.00%4.39%3.46%0.00%0.00%0.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

LEMB and ACWI have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ACWI has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to LEMB (2.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEMB dropped -30.82% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

On 10-year performance, ACWI leads with 12.85% vs 1.37% for LEMB. On fees, LEMB is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, LEMB has been the lower-risk option at 2.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 12.85% return vs 1.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LEMB is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

LEMB has the higher dividend yield at 2.41%, compared with 1.38% for ACWI.

LEMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while ACWI is Global Equities. LEMB tracks J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for LEMB and 0.32% for ACWI.

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.51), 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 LEMB and ACWI

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