BCHI vs. OAEM
BCHI (GMO Beyond China ETF) and OAEM (OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BCHI returned 62.50% vs 59.66% for OAEM. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCHI charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for OAEM.
Performance
BCHI vs. OAEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BCHI having a 34.99% return and OAEM slightly lower at 34.79%.
BCHI
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 7.93%
- YTD
- 34.99%
- 6M
- 37.70%
- 1Y
- 62.50%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OAEM
- 1D
- -0.94%
- 1M
- 4.17%
- YTD
- 34.79%
- 6M
- 42.39%
- 1Y
- 59.66%
- 3Y*
- 21.00%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BCHI vs. OAEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF | 34.99% | 25.80% |
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF | 34.79% | 20.04% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCHI and OAEM is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025 | 0.84 |
The correlation between BCHI and OAEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BCHI vs. OAEM — Risk / Return Rank
BCHI
OAEM
BCHI vs. OAEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM). 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.
| BCHI | OAEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.58 | 1.47 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.44 | 4.10 | +0.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.90 | 17.10 | +0.80 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BCHI | OAEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.16 | 2.68 | +0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.45 | 1.11 | +1.35 |
Drawdowns
BCHI vs. OAEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCHI drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, smaller than the maximum OAEM drawdown of -17.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCHI and OAEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCHI | OAEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.33% | -17.05% | +2.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.14% | -14.63% | +0.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -17.05% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.77% | -2.02% | +0.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.19% | -3.85% | +1.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.50% | 3.50% | 0.00% |
Volatility
BCHI vs. OAEM - Volatility Comparison
GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) has a higher volatility of 9.56% compared to OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF (OAEM) at 8.05%. This indicates that BCHI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OAEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCHI | OAEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.56% | 8.05% | +1.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.73% | 19.85% | -2.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.88% | 22.35% | -2.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 19.55% | +1.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 19.55% | +1.02% |
BCHI vs. OAEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCHI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than OAEM's 1.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
BCHI vs. OAEM - Dividend Comparison
BCHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.72%, more than OAEM's 0.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF | 2.72% | 3.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
OAEM OneAscent Emerging Markets ETF | 0.57% | 0.77% | 0.91% | 1.63% | 0.04% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCHI and OAEM have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BCHI has higher volatility (9.56%) compared to OAEM (8.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCHI dropped -14.33% vs OAEM's -17.05%.
On 1-year performance, BCHI leads with 62.50% vs 59.66% for OAEM. On fees, BCHI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, OAEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BCHI has performed better with a 62.50% return vs 59.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BCHI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for OAEM.
BCHI has the higher dividend yield at 2.72%, compared with 0.57% for OAEM.
They also come from different issuers: GMO and Oneascent. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BCHI and 1.25% for OAEM.
BCHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 2.68), 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.
Find the right allocation for BCHI and OAEM
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