BWZ vs. GEMD
Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) and Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD).
BWZ and GEMD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BWZ is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized. It was launched on Jan 15, 2009. GEMD is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the FTSE Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets USD Bond Index - Benchmark TR Net. It was launched on Feb 15, 2022. Both BWZ and GEMD are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: BWZ or GEMD.
Correlation
The correlation between BWZ and GEMD is 0.55, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
BWZ vs. GEMD - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
BWZ:
0.08
GEMD:
1.09
BWZ:
0.17
GEMD:
1.58
BWZ:
1.02
GEMD:
1.19
BWZ:
0.02
GEMD:
0.70
BWZ:
0.14
GEMD:
3.26
BWZ:
4.05%
GEMD:
2.15%
BWZ:
7.04%
GEMD:
6.45%
BWZ:
-34.22%
GEMD:
-24.57%
BWZ:
-27.47%
GEMD:
-3.41%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BWZ achieves a 2.60% return, which is significantly higher than GEMD's 2.22% return.
BWZ
2.60%
2.08%
-3.84%
0.52%
-1.76%
-1.10%
GEMD
2.22%
1.05%
-1.01%
5.78%
N/A
N/A
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
BWZ vs. GEMD - Expense Ratio Comparison
BWZ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than GEMD's 0.39% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
BWZ vs. GEMD — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
BWZ
GEMD
BWZ vs. GEMD - Risk-Adjusted Performance 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.
Dividends
BWZ vs. GEMD - Dividend Comparison
BWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.43%, less than GEMD's 5.68% yield.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.43% | 2.47% | 1.62% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 0.13% | 0.44% | 1.10% | 0.40% | 0.13% | 0.06% | 0.20% |
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 5.68% | 5.79% | 5.70% | 5.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
BWZ vs. GEMD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BWZ drawdown since its inception was -34.22%, which is greater than GEMD's maximum drawdown of -24.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWZ and GEMD. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
BWZ vs. GEMD - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) has a higher volatility of 2.08% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) at 1.50%. This indicates that BWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GEMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.