PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VDEA.L vs. CBND.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (VDEA.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VDEA.L achieves a 1.42% return, which is significantly lower than CBND.L's 4.87% return.


VDEA.L

1D
-0.03%
1M
-0.51%
6M
1.64%
YTD
1.42%
1Y
8.51%
3Y*
8.05%
5Y*
2.17%
10Y*

CBND.L

1D
0.05%
1M
0.02%
6M
4.64%
YTD
4.87%
1Y
7.44%
3Y*
5.57%
5Y*
2.85%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
VDEA.L
Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
1.42%11.45%6.35%9.71%-15.28%-1.74%6.10%2.04%
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
4.87%5.04%4.67%1.28%-5.17%7.61%8.70%3.08%

Correlation

The correlation between VDEA.L and CBND.L is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.26

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2019

0.29

The correlation between VDEA.L and CBND.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.26 (3 years) to 0.40 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

VDEA.L
VDEA.L Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
VDEA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VDEA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
VDEA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
VDEA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
VDEA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

CBND.L
CBND.L Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
CBND.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBND.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBND.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CBND.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBND.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (VDEA.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.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.


VDEA.LCBND.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.47

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.31

7.45

-5.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.11

18.48

-9.37

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VDEA.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the CBND.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VDEA.L and CBND.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VDEA.L drawdown since its inception was -24.08%, which is greater than CBND.L's maximum drawdown of -11.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VDEA.L and CBND.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VDEA.LCBND.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.08%

-11.48%

-12.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.66%

-0.99%

-2.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.15%

-3.66%

-2.49%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.08%

-11.48%

-12.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.78%

-0.21%

-0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.82%

-2.80%

-3.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.93%

0.40%

+0.53%

Volatility

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond UCITS ETF USD Accumulation (VDEA.L) has a higher volatility of 1.03% compared to Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) at 0.89%. This indicates that VDEA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBND.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VDEA.LCBND.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.03%

0.89%

+0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.12%

2.58%

+1.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.01%

3.11%

+1.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.27%

5.02%

+2.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.20%

4.94%

+3.26%

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

VDEA.L has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than CBND.L's 0.24% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

VDEA.L vs. CBND.L - Dividend Comparison

VDEA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBND.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
CBND.L
Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)
2.04%2.20%2.45%2.54%2.72%2.52%1.87%
VDEA.L
Vanguard USD Emerging Markets Government Bond UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


VDEA.L and CBND.L have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, VDEA.L is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

VDEA.L is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for CBND.L.

VDEA.L is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while CBND.L is Government Bonds. VDEA.L tracks Bloomberg EM USD Sovereign + Quasi-Sov Index, while CBND.L tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for VDEA.L and 0.24% for CBND.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for VDEA.L and CBND.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