LEMB vs. EMTL
LEMB (iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF) and EMTL (SPDR DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. LEMB is passively managed, while EMTL is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, LEMB returned 1.01%/yr vs 3.00%/yr for EMTL. Their 0.40 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. LEMB charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for EMTL.
Performance
LEMB vs. EMTL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LEMB achieves a 2.60% return, which is significantly higher than EMTL's 0.65% return. Over the past 10 years, LEMB has underperformed EMTL with an annualized return of 1.01%, while EMTL has yielded a comparatively higher 3.00% annualized return.
LEMB
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- 6M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- 2.60%
- 1Y
- 8.68%
- 3Y*
- 6.08%
- 5Y*
- 1.35%
- 10Y*
- 1.01%
- ALL TIME*
- 0.52%
EMTL
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.06%
- 6M
- 0.05%
- YTD
- 0.65%
- 1Y
- 3.21%
- 3Y*
- 6.49%
- 5Y*
- 1.51%
- 10Y*
- 3.00%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.41%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $352.14K | $728.16K | $831.05K | |
| $8.99M | $7.31M | $6.57M |
LEMB vs. EMTL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 2.60% | 18.02% | -1.72% | 7.23% | -10.74% | -9.92% | 3.10% | 6.40% | -7.49% | 12.49% |
EMTL SPDR DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income ETF | 0.65% | 8.27% | 5.86% | 9.60% | -14.31% | 0.56% | 3.48% | 11.99% | -2.37% | 7.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between LEMB and EMTL is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.51 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 14, 2016 | 0.40 |
The correlation between LEMB and EMTL shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (all time) to 0.51 (5 years), 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.
Return for Risk
LEMB vs. EMTL — Risk / Return Rank
LEMB
EMTL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LEMB vs. EMTL - 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 SPDR DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income ETF (EMTL). 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 | EMTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.29 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.45 | 1.75 | -0.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.65 | 6.17 | -1.51 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LEMB vs. EMTL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LEMB drawdown since its inception was -30.82%, which is greater than EMTL's maximum drawdown of -22.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEMB and EMTL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LEMB | EMTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.82% | -22.91% | -7.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.00% | -2.00% | -4.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.08% | -3.53% | -4.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.89% | -22.91% | -0.98% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.09% | -22.91% | -6.18% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.54% | -0.17% | -3.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.64% | -3.78% | -8.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.87% | 0.57% | +1.30% |
Volatility
LEMB vs. EMTL - Volatility Comparison
iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF (LEMB) has a higher volatility of 1.44% compared to SPDR DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income ETF (EMTL) at 0.43%. This indicates that LEMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMTL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LEMB | EMTL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.44% | 0.43% | +1.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.62% | 1.72% | +3.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.59% | 2.27% | +4.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.25% | 4.86% | +3.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.16% | 4.65% | +4.51% |
LEMB vs. EMTL - Expense Ratio Comparison
LEMB has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than EMTL's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
LEMB vs. EMTL - Dividend Comparison
LEMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.38%, while EMTL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMTL SPDR DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income ETF | 4.53% | 5.09% | 5.34% | 4.78% | 4.19% | 5.43% | 3.28% | 3.96% | 3.35% | 4.16% | 8.87% | 0.00% |
LEMB iShares J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond ETF | 2.38% | 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 EMTL have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LEMB has higher volatility (1.44%) compared to EMTL (0.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEMB dropped -30.82% vs EMTL's -22.91%.
On 10-year performance, EMTL leads with 3.00% vs 1.01% for LEMB. On fees, LEMB is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, EMTL has been the lower-risk option at 0.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, EMTL has performed better with a 3.00% return vs 1.01%. 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 0.65% for EMTL.
EMTL has the higher dividend yield at 4.53%, compared with 2.38% for LEMB.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for LEMB and 0.65% for EMTL.
EMTL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs 1.33), 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.
Find the right allocation for LEMB and EMTL
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