AGEM vs. GLTR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AGEM (abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AGEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by abrdn, while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. AGEM is actively managed, while GLTR is passively managed. Over the past year, AGEM returned 56.63% vs 33.31% for GLTR. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AGEM charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.

Performance

AGEM vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF (AGEM) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGEM achieves a 27.99% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -9.21% return.

AGEM

• 1D: -4.79%
• 1M: 3.37%
• YTD: 27.99%
• 6M: 28.48%
• 1Y: 56.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLTR

• 1D: -3.07%
• 1M: -12.32%
• YTD: -9.21%
• 6M: -12.60%
• 1Y: 33.31%
• 3Y*: 29.08%
• 5Y*: 14.31%
• 10Y*: 11.27%

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

AGEM vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AGEM abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF	27.99%	29.73%
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	-9.21%	70.02%

Correlation

The correlation between AGEM and GLTR is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025	0.36

Return for Risk

AGEM vs. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGEM

AGEM Risk / Return Rank: 83
AGEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
AGEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
AGEM Omega Ratio Rank: 84
AGEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
AGEM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

GLTR

GLTR Risk / Return Rank: 24
GLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
GLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
GLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 29
GLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
GLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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.

AGEM vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF (AGEM) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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.

	AGEM	GLTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	0.86	+1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.16	1.22	+1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.19	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.09	0.97	+3.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.21	2.27	+12.94

AGEM vs. GLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is higher than the GLTR Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGEM and GLTR, 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

AGEM vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGEM drawdown since its inception was -15.58%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGEM and GLTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGEM	GLTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.58%	-55.70%	+40.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.92%	-34.55%	+20.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-34.55%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.55%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.55%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.79%	-34.55%	+29.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.30%	-28.83%	+26.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.73%	14.68%	-10.95%

Volatility

AGEM vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF (AGEM) has a higher volatility of 11.80% compared to abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) at 10.06%. This indicates that AGEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGEM	GLTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.80%	10.06%	+1.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.42%	36.51%	-16.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.51%	38.78%	-16.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.90%	23.90%	-1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.90%	20.68%	+2.22%

AGEM vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGEM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGEM vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison

AGEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, while GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
AGEM abrdn Emerging Markets Dividend Active ETF	2.33%	1.80%
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGEM and GLTR in my portfolio?

AGEM and GLTR have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AGEM or GLTR?

AGEM has higher volatility (11.80%) compared to GLTR (10.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGEM dropped -15.58% vs GLTR's -55.70%.

Which ETF is better, AGEM or GLTR?

On 1-year performance, AGEM leads with 56.63% vs 33.31% for GLTR. On fees, GLTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, GLTR has been the lower-risk option at 10.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AGEM or GLTR?

Over the 1-year period, AGEM has performed better with a 56.63% return vs 33.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGEM or GLTR?

GLTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for AGEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AGEM or GLTR?

AGEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.33%, compared with 0.00% for GLTR.

What is the main difference between AGEM and GLTR?

AGEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for AGEM and 0.60% for GLTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AGEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.86), 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.