BWZ vs. GEMD
BWZ (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF) and GEMD (Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BWZ is a International Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized, while GEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets USD Bond Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BWZ returned 2.15%/yr vs 8.15%/yr for GEMD. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BWZ charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for GEMD.
Performance
BWZ vs. GEMD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BWZ achieves a -1.65% return, which is significantly lower than GEMD's 2.30% return.
BWZ
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- -1.11%
- YTD
- -1.65%
- 6M
- -1.18%
- 1Y
- -1.14%
- 3Y*
- 2.15%
- 5Y*
- -1.80%
- 10Y*
- -0.57%
GEMD
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 1.83%
- YTD
- 2.30%
- 6M
- 2.33%
- 1Y
- 11.10%
- 3Y*
- 8.15%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BWZ vs. GEMD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | -1.65% | 10.47% | -5.31% | 2.97% | -10.24% |
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 2.30% | 13.67% | 3.31% | 8.51% | -15.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between BWZ and GEMD is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2022 | 0.49 |
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
BWZ vs. GEMD — Risk / Return Rank
BWZ
GEMD
BWZ vs. GEMD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) and Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD). 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.
| BWZ | GEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.37 | -0.39 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.22 | 2.40 | -2.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.47 | 10.09 | -10.56 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BWZ vs. GEMD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BWZ drawdown since its inception was -34.23%, which is greater than GEMD's maximum drawdown of -24.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWZ and GEMD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BWZ | GEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.23% | -24.56% | -9.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.15% | -4.64% | -0.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.60% | -7.69% | -0.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.15% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.20% | -0.39% | -22.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.12% | -8.09% | -8.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.40% | 1.10% | +1.30% |
Volatility
BWZ vs. GEMD - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) and Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) have volatilities of 1.77% and 1.81%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BWZ | GEMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.77% | 1.81% | -0.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.11% | 4.60% | +0.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.87% | 5.68% | +1.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.60% | 9.92% | -2.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.96% | 9.92% | -2.96% |
BWZ vs. GEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison
BWZ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GEMD's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
BWZ vs. GEMD - Dividend Comparison
BWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, less than GEMD's 5.65% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.12% | 2.05% | 2.47% | 1.63% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 0.13% | 0.43% | 1.10% | 0.40% | 0.13% | 0.06% |
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 5.65% | 6.32% | 5.79% | 5.70% | 5.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BWZ and GEMD have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GEMD has higher volatility (1.81%) compared to BWZ (1.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BWZ dropped -34.23% vs GEMD's -24.56%.
On 3-year performance, GEMD leads with 8.15% vs 2.15% for BWZ. On fees, BWZ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GEMD has performed better with a 8.15% return vs 2.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BWZ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GEMD.
GEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.65%, compared with 2.12% for BWZ.
BWZ is categorized as International Government Bonds, while GEMD is Emerging Markets Bonds. BWZ tracks Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized, while GEMD tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets USD Bond Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BWZ and 0.39% for GEMD.
GEMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs -0.17), 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 BWZ and GEMD
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