PCMM vs. EMBD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PCMM (BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF) and EMBD (Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PCMM is a CLO fund actively managed by BondBloxx, while EMBD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund actively managed by Global X. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PCMM returned 4.45% vs 10.34% for EMBD. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. PCMM charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for EMBD.

Performance

PCMM vs. EMBD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) and Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCMM achieves a 1.15% return, which is significantly lower than EMBD's 1.27% return.

PCMM

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 1.15%
• 6M: 1.71%
• 1Y: 4.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMBD

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 0.94%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 2.05%
• 1Y: 10.34%
• 3Y*: 9.44%
• 5Y*: 2.87%
• 10Y*: —

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

PCMM vs. EMBD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	1.15%	6.30%	0.50%
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	1.27%	12.55%	-1.70%

Correlation

The correlation between PCMM and EMBD is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2024	-0.00

Return for Risk

PCMM vs. EMBD — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCMM

PCMM Risk / Return Rank: 36
PCMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
PCMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
PCMM Omega Ratio Rank: 32
PCMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
PCMM Martin Ratio Rank: 44

EMBD

EMBD Risk / Return Rank: 52
EMBD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
EMBD Omega Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
EMBD Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

PCMM vs. EMBD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) and Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD). 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.

	PCMM	EMBD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.16	1.73	-0.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.66	2.59	-0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.32	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.07	2.45	-0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.21	9.52	-2.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PCMM vs. EMBD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.16, which is lower than the EMBD Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCMM and EMBD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PCMM	EMBD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.16	1.73	-0.57
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.31	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	0.46	+0.62

Drawdowns

PCMM vs. EMBD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCMM drawdown since its inception was -4.32%, smaller than the maximum EMBD drawdown of -24.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCMM and EMBD.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCMM	EMBD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.32%	-24.27%	+19.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.16%	-4.23%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.03%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.27%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-0.50%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-5.88%	+5.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.62%	1.09%	-0.47%

Volatility

PCMM vs. EMBD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) is 1.22%, while Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF (EMBD) has a volatility of 1.62%. This indicates that PCMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMBD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCMM	EMBD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.22%	1.62%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.64%	4.16%	-1.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.94%	6.00%	-2.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.97%	9.17%	-4.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.97%	8.89%	-3.92%

PCMM vs. EMBD - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCMM has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than EMBD's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCMM vs. EMBD - Dividend Comparison

PCMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.62%, more than EMBD's 5.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EMBD Global X Emerging Markets Bond ETF	5.69%	5.48%	5.83%	5.29%	4.53%	4.99%	3.34%
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	6.62%	7.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCMM and EMBD in my portfolio?

PCMM and EMBD have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCMM or EMBD?

EMBD has higher volatility (1.62%) compared to PCMM (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCMM dropped -4.32% vs EMBD's -24.27%.

Which ETF is better, PCMM or EMBD?

On 1-year performance, EMBD leads with 10.34% vs 4.45% for PCMM. On fees, EMBD is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, PCMM has been the lower-risk option at 1.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCMM or EMBD?

Over the 1-year period, EMBD has performed better with a 10.34% return vs 4.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCMM or EMBD?

EMBD is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for PCMM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCMM or EMBD?

PCMM has the higher dividend yield at 6.62%, compared with 5.69% for EMBD.

What is the main difference between PCMM and EMBD?

PCMM is categorized as CLO, while EMBD is Emerging Markets Bonds. They also come from different issuers: BondBloxx and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for PCMM and 0.39% for EMBD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMBD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.16), 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.