QUID.L vs. EMLB.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

QUID.L (PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF) and EMLB.L (PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - QUID.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF, while EMLB.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Currency Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QUID.L returned 2.00%/yr vs 2.87%/yr for EMLB.L. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF (QUID.L) and PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

QUID.L is traded in GBP, while EMLB.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the EMLB.L values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with QUID.L having a 2.18% return and EMLB.L slightly higher at 2.24%. Over the past 10 years, QUID.L has underperformed EMLB.L with an annualized return of 2.00%, while EMLB.L has yielded a comparatively higher 2.87% annualized return.

QUID.L

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.36%
• 6M: 1.97%
• YTD: 2.18%
• 1Y: 4.36%
• 3Y*: 5.10%
• 5Y*: 3.28%
• 10Y*: 2.00%

EMLB.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -1.08%
• 6M: 1.42%
• YTD: 2.24%
• 1Y: 7.25%
• 3Y*: 4.61%
• 5Y*: 4.28%
• 10Y*: 2.87%

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

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QUID.L PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF	2.18%	4.89%	5.67%	4.95%	-0.96%	-0.07%	0.71%	1.57%	0.26%	0.52%
EMLB.L PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	2.24%	8.74%	-1.56%	8.05%	5.51%	-4.64%	-1.08%	8.80%	-1.38%	2.82%

Correlation

The correlation between QUID.L and EMLB.L is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.05
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2011	0.03

Return for Risk

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

QUID.L

QUID.L Risk / Return Rank: 99
QUID.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
QUID.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
QUID.L Omega Ratio Rank: 99
QUID.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
QUID.L Martin Ratio Rank: 99

EMLB.L

EMLB.L Risk / Return Rank: 40
EMLB.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
EMLB.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
EMLB.L Omega Ratio Rank: 43
EMLB.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
EMLB.L Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF (QUID.L) and PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.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.

	QUID.L	EMLB.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	6.00	0.98	+5.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	10.83	1.44	+9.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.80	1.19	+1.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.83	1.67	+8.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	78.74	4.58	+74.16

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QUID.L Sharpe Ratio is 6.00, which is higher than the EMLB.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QUID.L and EMLB.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

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QUID.L drawdown since its inception was -2.47%, smaller than the maximum EMLB.L drawdown of -28.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QUID.L and EMLB.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	QUID.L	EMLB.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.47%	-28.61%	+26.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.45%	-4.34%	+3.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.45%	-4.68%	+4.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-2.47%	-12.08%	+9.61%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-2.47%	-20.11%	+17.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.23%	+2.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.21%	-7.66%	+7.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.06%	1.59%	-1.53%

Volatility

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF (QUID.L) is 0.19%, while PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMLB.L) has a volatility of 1.92%. This indicates that QUID.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMLB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QUID.L	EMLB.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.19%	1.92%	-1.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.64%	6.34%	-5.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74%	7.41%	-6.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.74%	9.99%	-9.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.62%	10.86%	-10.24%

Dividends

QUID.L vs. EMLB.L - Dividend Comparison

QUID.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.17%, while EMLB.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMLB.L PIMCO Advantage Emerging Markets Local Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QUID.L PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF	4.17%	4.19%	4.67%	3.69%	0.66%	0.08%	0.31%	0.73%	0.52%	0.33%	0.59%	0.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QUID.L and EMLB.L in my portfolio?

QUID.L and EMLB.L have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

What is the main difference between QUID.L and EMLB.L?

QUID.L is categorized as Global Equities, while EMLB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. QUID.L tracks PIMCO Sterling Short Maturity UCITS ETF, while EMLB.L tracks PIMCO Emerging Markets Advantage Local Currency Bond Index.