PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

LEMB vs. CEMB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and CEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond 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 CEMB is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the JP Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, LEMB returned 1.37%/yr vs 3.49%/yr for CEMB. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LEMB charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CEMB.

Performance

LEMB vs. CEMB - 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 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, LEMB achieves a 1.19% return, which is significantly lower than CEMB's 1.49% return. Over the past 10 years, LEMB has underperformed CEMB with an annualized return of 1.37%, while CEMB has yielded a comparatively higher 3.49% 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%

CEMB

1D
-0.20%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.49%
6M
1.83%
1Y
7.31%
3Y*
7.31%
5Y*
1.97%
10Y*
3.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LEMB vs. CEMB - 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%
CEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF		1.49%8.86%5.81%8.37%-12.58%-0.59%6.77%13.90%-2.57%7.11%

Correlation

The correlation between LEMB and CEMB is 0.58, 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

0.58

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

0.54

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

0.54

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

0.45

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2012

0.35

Over the past year, LEMB and CEMB have become more correlated (0.58) than their long-term average of 0.35, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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 J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF

Often compared with LEMB:
LEMB vs. EMLCLEMB vs. EMBLEMB vs. EBNDLEMB vs. VWOBLEMB vs. PFUIXLEMB vs. PELBXLEMB vs. FLOT
Often compared with CEMB:
CEMB vs. EMBE.LCEMB vs. HYEMCEMB vs. IAGGCEMB vs. AGGG.LCEMB vs. ERNS.LCEMB vs. VEMT.LCEMB vs. VUCP.DE

Return for Risk

LEMB vs. CEMB — 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
CEMB
CEMB Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
CEMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CEMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
CEMB Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
CEMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
CEMB Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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. CEMB - 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 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.

LEMBCEMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.51
2.40

-0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.10
3.61

-1.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.47

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.64

2.55

-0.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.58

11.06

-5.47

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. CEMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is lower than the CEMB Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEMB 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

LEMBCEMBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.51

2.40

-0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.07

0.35

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

0.56

-0.41

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.05

0.49

-0.45

Drawdowns

LEMB vs. CEMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.82%, which is greater than CEMB's maximum drawdown of -20.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEMB and CEMB.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

LEMBCEMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.82%

-20.84%

-9.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.00%

-2.88%

-3.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.09%

-3.85%

-6.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.29%

-20.48%

-4.81%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.09%

-20.84%

-8.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.87%

-0.24%

-4.63%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.74%

-3.66%

-9.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.76%

0.66%

+1.10%

Volatility

LEMB vs. CEMB - Volatility Comparison

iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) has a higher volatility of 2.09% compared to iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF (CEMB) at 1.08%. This indicates that LEMB'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

LEMBCEMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.09%

1.08%

+1.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.34%

2.43%

+2.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.54%

3.06%

+3.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.24%

5.63%

+2.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.29%

6.30%

+2.99%

LEMB vs. CEMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEMB has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CEMB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEMB vs. CEMB - Dividend Comparison

LEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than CEMB's 5.13% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CEMB
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Corporate Bond ETF		5.13%5.14%5.11%4.77%4.29%3.51%3.86%4.19%4.66%4.06%4.26%4.76%
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 CEMB have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LEMB has higher volatility (2.09%) compared to CEMB (1.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEMB dropped -30.82% vs CEMB's -20.84%.

On 10-year performance, CEMB leads with 3.49% vs 1.37% for LEMB. On fees, LEMB is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, CEMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CEMB has performed better with a 3.49% 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 0.50% for CEMB.

CEMB has the higher dividend yield at 5.13%, compared with 2.41% for LEMB.

LEMB is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while CEMB is Corporate Bonds. LEMB tracks J.P. Morgan GBI-EM Global 15 cap 4.5 floor, while CEMB tracks JP Morgan CEMBI Broad Diversified. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for LEMB and 0.50% for CEMB.

CEMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 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 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