PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L
PEMD.L (Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist) and CYGB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - PEMD.L tracks the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD while CYGB.L tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PEMD.L returned 2.09%/yr vs 5.08%/yr for CYGB.L. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PEMD.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CYGB.L.
Performance
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
PEMD.L is traded in USD, while CYGB.L is traded in GBP. To make them comparable, the CYGB.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PEMD.L achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly lower than CYGB.L's 4.04% return.
PEMD.L
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- -0.72%
- 6M
- 1.73%
- YTD
- 1.49%
- 1Y
- 9.13%
- 3Y*
- 8.52%
- 5Y*
- 2.09%
- 10Y*
- —
CYGB.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.54%
- 6M
- 3.81%
- YTD
- 4.04%
- 1Y
- 4.68%
- 3Y*
- 7.94%
- 5Y*
- 5.08%
- 10Y*
- —
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PEMD.L Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist | 1.49% | 12.80% | 6.18% | 10.57% | -16.55% | 1.41% |
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 4.04% | 9.91% | 9.53% | 12.79% | -8.81% | -1.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between PEMD.L and CYGB.L is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2021 | 0.29 |
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
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L — Risk / Return Rank
PEMD.L
CYGB.L
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist (PEMD.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.L). 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.
| PEMD.L | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.11 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.05 | 1.08 | +0.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.00 | 2.45 | +5.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PEMD.L drawdown since its inception was -26.75%, which is greater than CYGB.L's maximum drawdown of -22.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PEMD.L and CYGB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PEMD.L | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.75% | -22.10% | -4.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.43% | -4.04% | -0.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.96% | -6.72% | -1.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.65% | -21.63% | -5.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.72% | 0.00% | -0.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.40% | -4.36% | -2.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.14% | 1.78% | -0.64% |
Volatility
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist (PEMD.L) is 1.03%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (CYGB.L) has a volatility of 1.98%. This indicates that PEMD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CYGB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PEMD.L | CYGB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.03% | 1.98% | -0.95% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.77% | 5.70% | -0.93% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.95% | 7.38% | -1.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.33% | 8.87% | +0.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.10% | 8.74% | +2.36% |
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
PEMD.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CYGB.L's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
PEMD.L vs. CYGB.L - Dividend Comparison
PEMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.51%, more than CYGB.L's 1.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CYGB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 1.70% | 1.84% | 2.13% | 2.38% | 2.68% | 2.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PEMD.L Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist | 5.51% | 5.49% | 5.83% | 5.54% | 4.94% | 3.93% | 3.60% | 4.99% | 5.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PEMD.L and CYGB.L have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PEMD.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PEMD.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CYGB.L.
PEMD.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while CYGB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for PEMD.L and 0.40% for CYGB.L.
Find the right allocation for PEMD.L and CYGB.L
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