SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE
SEAB.DE (UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM Diversified Bond 1-5 UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc) and ICGB.DE (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds - SEAB.DE tracks the JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets Diversified 3% capped 1-5 (EUR Hedged) while ICGB.DE tracks the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SEAB.DE returned 0.98%/yr vs 3.74%/yr for ICGB.DE. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. SEAB.DE charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ICGB.DE.
Performance
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SEAB.DE achieves a 1.34% return, which is significantly lower than ICGB.DE's 8.51% return.
SEAB.DE
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -0.39%
- 6M
- 1.02%
- YTD
- 1.34%
- 1Y
- 5.24%
- 3Y*
- 5.89%
- 5Y*
- 0.98%
- 10Y*
- —
ICGB.DE
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- 1.66%
- 6M
- 7.11%
- YTD
- 8.51%
- 1Y
- 9.27%
- 3Y*
- 5.17%
- 5Y*
- 3.74%
- 10Y*
- —
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SEAB.DE UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM Diversified Bond 1-5 UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc | 1.34% | 7.72% | 5.56% | 5.68% | -12.29% | -0.74% | 1.25% | -0.50% |
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 8.51% | -7.16% | 11.36% | -2.27% | 1.10% | 17.31% | 0.08% | -10.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between SEAB.DE and ICGB.DE is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.23 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | -0.13 |
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
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE — Risk / Return Rank
SEAB.DE
ICGB.DE
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM Diversified Bond 1-5 UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc (SEAB.DE) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE). 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.
| SEAB.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.40 | 1.32 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.58 | 3.33 | -0.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.64 | 8.75 | +1.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SEAB.DE drawdown since its inception was -18.02%, which is greater than ICGB.DE's maximum drawdown of -13.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEAB.DE and ICGB.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SEAB.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.02% | -13.36% | -4.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.02% | -2.77% | +0.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.41% | -11.17% | +8.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.02% | -13.36% | -4.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.39% | -1.22% | +0.83% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.72% | -6.40% | +1.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.49% | 1.06% | -0.57% |
Volatility
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM Diversified Bond 1-5 UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc (SEAB.DE) is 0.51%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (ICGB.DE) has a volatility of 1.31%. This indicates that SEAB.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICGB.DE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SEAB.DE | ICGB.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.51% | 1.31% | -0.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.25% | 3.60% | -1.35% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.70% | 5.40% | -2.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.49% | 6.63% | -2.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.13% | 7.90% | -2.77% |
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
SEAB.DE has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than ICGB.DE's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
SEAB.DE vs. ICGB.DE - Dividend Comparison
SEAB.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ICGB.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICGB.DE iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.68% | 1.92% | 2.22% | 2.58% | 2.80% | 2.71% | 2.63% | 0.95% |
SEAB.DE UBS ETF (LU) J.P. Morgan USD EM Diversified Bond 1-5 UCITS ETF (EUR Hedged) Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SEAB.DE and ICGB.DE have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICGB.DE is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICGB.DE is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for SEAB.DE.
SEAB.DE tracks JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets Diversified 3% capped 1-5 (EUR Hedged), while ICGB.DE tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for SEAB.DE and 0.35% for ICGB.DE.
Find the right allocation for SEAB.DE and ICGB.DE
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