PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

PEMD.L (Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist) and EMAU.L (L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - PEMD.L tracks the JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD while EMAU.L tracks the J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PEMD.L returned 8.52%/yr vs 6.29%/yr for EMAU.L. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PEMD.L charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EMAU.L.

Performance

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist (PEMD.L) and L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PEMD.L achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly higher than EMAU.L's 1.29% 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*: —

EMAU.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.27%
• 6M: 0.92%
• YTD: 1.29%
• 1Y: 5.57%
• 3Y*: 6.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.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%	-1.34%
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	1.29%	8.06%	5.68%	6.84%	-11.34%	-1.23%

Correlation

The correlation between PEMD.L and EMAU.L is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2021	0.67

The correlation between PEMD.L and EMAU.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

PEMD.L

PEMD.L Risk / Return Rank: 56
PEMD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
PEMD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
PEMD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PEMD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
PEMD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 56

EMAU.L

EMAU.L Risk / Return Rank: 63
EMAU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
EMAU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EMAU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 64
EMAU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
EMAU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.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 L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.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	EMAU.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	1.64	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	2.50	-0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.31	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	2.18	-0.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.00	9.66	-1.66

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PEMD.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is comparable to the EMAU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PEMD.L and EMAU.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PEMD.L drawdown since its inception was -26.75%, which is greater than EMAU.L's maximum drawdown of -19.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PEMD.L and EMAU.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	PEMD.L	EMAU.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.75%	-19.62%	-7.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.43%	-2.55%	-1.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.96%	-3.01%	-4.95%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.65%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.72%	-0.27%	-0.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.40%	-5.68%	-0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.14%	0.57%	+0.57%

Volatility

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Emerging Markets USD Bond UCITS ETF Dist (PEMD.L) has a higher volatility of 1.03% compared to L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAU.L) at 0.85%. This indicates that PEMD.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMAU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PEMD.L	EMAU.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.03%	0.85%	+0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.77%	2.81%	+1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.95%	3.39%	+2.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.33%	5.58%	+3.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.10%	5.58%	+5.52%

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

PEMD.L has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAU.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PEMD.L vs. EMAU.L - Dividend Comparison

PEMD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.51%, while EMAU.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMAU.L L&G Emerging Markets Corporate Bond (USD) Screened UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both PEMD.L and EMAU.L in my portfolio?

PEMD.L and EMAU.L have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PEMD.L or EMAU.L?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, PEMD.L or EMAU.L?

PEMD.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EMAU.L.

What is the main difference between PEMD.L and EMAU.L?

PEMD.L tracks JPM EMBI Global Diversified TR USD, while EMAU.L tracks J.P. Morgan ESG CEMBI Broad Diversified Custom Maturity Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and L&G. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for PEMD.L and 0.35% for EMAU.L.