NEMD vs. EMHC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NEMD (Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF) and EMHC (SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. NEMD is actively managed, while EMHC is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NEMD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for EMHC.

Performance

NEMD vs. EMHC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF (NEMD) and SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NEMD achieves a 3.76% return, which is significantly higher than EMHC's 1.57% return.

NEMD

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 1.56%
• YTD: 3.76%
• 6M: 4.02%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMHC

• 1D: -0.32%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 1.57%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 11.54%
• 3Y*: 8.74%
• 5Y*: 1.55%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NEMD vs. EMHC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	3.76%	7.07%
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.57%	5.40%

Correlation

The correlation between NEMD and EMHC is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 12, 2025	0.88

NEMD vs. EMHC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NEMD	EMHC
Energy	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

NEMD vs. EMHC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

EMHC

EMHC Risk / Return Rank: 64
EMHC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
EMHC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
EMHC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
EMHC Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EMHC Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

NEMD vs. EMHC - 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 SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (EMHC). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NEMD	EMHC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.17	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.14	0.22	+1.92

Drawdowns

NEMD vs. EMHC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NEMD drawdown since its inception was -4.43%, smaller than the maximum EMHC drawdown of -28.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NEMD and EMHC.

Drawdown Indicators

	NEMD	EMHC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.43%	-28.03%	+23.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.37%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.67%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.03%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.32%	-0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.57%	-9.91%	+9.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.04%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	NEMD	EMHC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.89%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	4.16%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.51%	5.43%	+1.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.51%	9.06%	-2.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.51%	8.96%	-2.45%

NEMD vs. EMHC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NEMD has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than EMHC's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

NEMD vs. EMHC - Dividend Comparison

NEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.73%, less than EMHC's 6.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EMHC SPDR Bloomberg Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	6.11%	6.16%	5.95%	5.12%	5.11%	2.97%
NEMD Neuberger Berman Emerging Markets Debt Hard Currency ETF	4.73%	2.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NEMD and EMHC in my portfolio?

NEMD and EMHC have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NEMD or EMHC?

On fees, EMHC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NEMD or EMHC?

EMHC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for NEMD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NEMD or EMHC?

EMHC has the higher dividend yield at 6.11%, compared with 4.73% for NEMD.

What is the main difference between NEMD and EMHC?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for NEMD and 0.23% for EMHC.