LEMB vs. BREM
LEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and BREM (iShares Emerging Markets Bond Active ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. LEMB is passively managed, while BREM is actively managed. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LEMB charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BREM.
Performance
LEMB vs. BREM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LEMB achieves a 1.61% return, which is significantly lower than BREM's 3.77% return.
LEMB
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 1.29%
- YTD
- 1.61%
- 6M
- 1.81%
- 1Y
- 9.04%
- 3Y*
- 5.76%
- 5Y*
- 1.05%
- 10Y*
- 1.41%
BREM
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 1.52%
- YTD
- 3.77%
- 6M
- 3.87%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LEMB vs. BREM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 1.61% | 3.26% |
BREM iShares Emerging Markets Bond Active ETF | 3.77% | 2.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between LEMB and BREM is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 16, 2025 | 0.65 |
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
LEMB vs. BREM — Risk / Return Rank
LEMB
BREM
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LEMB vs. BREM - 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 Emerging Markets Bond Active ETF (BREM). 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.
| LEMB | BREM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.51 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.98 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LEMB vs. BREM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.82%, which is greater than BREM's maximum drawdown of -4.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEMB and BREM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LEMB | BREM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.82% | -4.54% | -26.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.00% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -10.09% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.96% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.09% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.47% | -0.58% | -3.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.71% | -0.63% | -12.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.82% | — | — |
Volatility
LEMB vs. BREM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LEMB | BREM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.09% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.60% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.73% | 5.61% | +1.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.25% | 5.61% | +2.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.22% | 5.61% | +3.61% |
LEMB vs. BREM - Expense Ratio Comparison
LEMB has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than BREM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
LEMB vs. BREM - Dividend Comparison
LEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, less than BREM's 3.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BREM iShares Emerging Markets Bond Active ETF | 3.89% | 1.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 2.40% | 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 BREM have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LEMB is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LEMB is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BREM.
BREM has the higher dividend yield at 3.89%, compared with 2.40% for LEMB.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for LEMB and 0.50% for BREM.
Find the right allocation for LEMB and BREM
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