NEMD vs. CBON
NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) and CBON (VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. NEMD is actively managed, while CBON is passively managed. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NEMD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CBON.
Performance
NEMD vs. CBON - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NEMD achieves a 3.89% return, which is significantly lower than CBON's 5.20% return.
NEMD
- 1D
- -0.73%
- 1M
- -0.53%
- 6M
- 3.30%
- YTD
- 3.89%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBON
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- -0.09%
- 6M
- 5.11%
- YTD
- 5.20%
- 1Y
- 8.50%
- 3Y*
- 4.80%
- 5Y*
- 2.13%
- 10Y*
- 3.05%
NEMD vs. CBON - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 3.89% | 7.10% |
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 5.20% | 3.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between NEMD and CBON is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 2025 | 0.28 |
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
NEMD vs. CBON — Risk / Return Rank
NEMD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CBON
NEMD vs. CBON - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD) and VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF (CBON). 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.
| NEMD | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.47 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 6.37 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 23.78 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NEMD vs. CBON - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NEMD drawdown since its inception was -4.43%, smaller than the maximum CBON drawdown of -14.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEMD and CBON.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NEMD | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.43% | -14.13% | +9.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.34% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.56% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.13% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.95% | -0.26% | -0.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.56% | -3.96% | +3.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.36% | — |
Volatility
NEMD vs. CBON - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NEMD | CBON | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.95% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.69% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.55% | 3.52% | +3.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 4.91% | +1.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 5.55% | +1.00% |
NEMD vs. CBON - Expense Ratio Comparison
NEMD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than CBON's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
NEMD vs. CBON - Dividend Comparison
NEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.25%, more than CBON's 1.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CBON VanEck Vectors ChinaAMC China Bond ETF | 1.51% | 1.66% | 2.15% | 3.01% | 2.70% | 3.05% | 2.87% | 3.87% | 3.39% | 3.33% | 3.25% | 2.78% |
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF | 5.25% | 2.39% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NEMD and CBON have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CBON is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CBON is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for NEMD.
NEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.25%, compared with 1.51% for CBON.
They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for NEMD and 0.50% for CBON.
Find the right allocation for NEMD and CBON
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