XEMD vs. BBBS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

XEMD (BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF) and BBBS (Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the JP Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Liquid 1-10 Y Maturity Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BBBS is a Short-Term Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Corporate BBB 1-5 Year Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XEMD returned 11.70% vs 4.14% for BBBS. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XEMD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BBBS.

Performance

XEMD vs. BBBS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) and Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF (BBBS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XEMD achieves a 3.04% return, which is significantly higher than BBBS's 0.68% return.

XEMD

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: 1.03%
• YTD: 3.04%
• 6M: 3.23%
• 1Y: 11.70%
• 3Y*: 11.00%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BBBS

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 0.68%
• 6M: 0.95%
• 1Y: 4.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XEMD vs. BBBS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XEMD BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF	3.04%	13.98%	10.14%
BBBS Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF	0.68%	6.67%	4.97%

Correlation

The correlation between XEMD and BBBS is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.57

The correlation between XEMD and BBBS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XEMD vs. BBBS — Risk / Return Rank

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

XEMD

XEMD Risk / Return Rank: 80
XEMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
XEMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
XEMD Omega Ratio Rank: 84
XEMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
XEMD Martin Ratio Rank: 79

BBBS

BBBS Risk / Return Rank: 70
BBBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
BBBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BBBS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
BBBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
BBBS Martin Ratio Rank: 65

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.

XEMD vs. BBBS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) and Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF (BBBS). 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.

	XEMD	BBBS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	2.20	+0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.38	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.44	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.34	2.87	+0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.92	11.59	+3.33

XEMD vs. BBBS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XEMD Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is comparable to the BBBS Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XEMD and BBBS, 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

XEMD vs. BBBS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XEMD drawdown since its inception was -10.01%, which is greater than BBBS's maximum drawdown of -1.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XEMD and BBBS.

Drawdown Indicators

	XEMD	BBBS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.01%	-1.45%	-8.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.52%	-1.45%	-2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.29%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.25%	-0.28%	-0.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.79%	0.36%	+0.43%

Volatility

XEMD vs. BBBS - Volatility Comparison

BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF (XEMD) has a higher volatility of 1.48% compared to Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF (BBBS) at 0.63%. This indicates that XEMD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BBBS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XEMD	BBBS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.48%	0.63%	+0.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.87%	1.45%	+2.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.80%	1.90%	+2.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.88%	2.24%	+4.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.88%	2.24%	+4.64%

XEMD vs. BBBS - Expense Ratio Comparison

XEMD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than BBBS's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

XEMD vs. BBBS - Dividend Comparison

XEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.81%, more than BBBS's 4.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BBBS Bondbloxx BBB Rated 1-5 Year Corporate Bond ETF	4.58%	4.55%	4.31%	0.00%	0.00%
XEMD BondBloxx JP Morgan USD Emerging Markets 1-10 Year Bond ETF	5.81%	6.15%	6.30%	6.19%	3.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XEMD and BBBS in my portfolio?

XEMD and BBBS have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XEMD or BBBS?

XEMD has higher volatility (1.48%) compared to BBBS (0.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XEMD dropped -10.01% vs BBBS's -1.45%.

Which ETF is better, XEMD or BBBS?

On 1-year performance, XEMD leads with 11.70% vs 4.14% for BBBS. On fees, BBBS is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BBBS has been the lower-risk option at 0.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XEMD or BBBS?

Over the 1-year period, XEMD has performed better with a 11.70% return vs 4.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XEMD or BBBS?

BBBS is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for XEMD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XEMD or BBBS?

XEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.81%, compared with 4.58% for BBBS.

What is the main difference between XEMD and BBBS?

XEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while BBBS is Short-Term Bond. XEMD tracks JP Morgan EMBI Global Diversified Liquid 1-10 Y Maturity Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BBBS tracks Bloomberg U.S. Corporate BBB 1-5 Year Index. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for XEMD and 0.19% for BBBS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XEMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 2.20), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.