PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EEM vs. GDXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EEM vs. GDXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 20.18% return, which is significantly higher than GDXJ's -10.70% return. Over the past 10 years, EEM has underperformed GDXJ with an annualized return of 9.37%, while GDXJ has yielded a comparatively higher 11.53% annualized return.


EEM

1D
1.80%
1M
-3.22%
YTD
20.18%
6M
22.10%
1Y
43.51%
3Y*
20.79%
5Y*
5.98%
10Y*
9.37%

GDXJ

1D
1.01%
1M
-19.25%
YTD
-10.70%
6M
-0.52%
1Y
50.65%
3Y*
42.13%
5Y*
15.86%
10Y*
11.53%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEM vs. GDXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
20.18%33.98%6.49%8.95%-20.56%-3.63%17.02%18.22%-15.31%37.26%
GDXJ
VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF
-10.70%172.28%15.67%7.12%-14.53%-21.25%30.40%40.44%-11.02%8.22%

Correlation

The correlation between EEM and GDXJ is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.48

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 11, 2009

0.36

The correlation between EEM and GDXJ shifts across timeframes, from 0.35 (10 years) to 0.48 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EEM vs. GDXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EEM
GDXJ

Technology

43.6%

-

Financial Services

17.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

8.1%

-

Industrials

6.2%

-

Basic Materials

6.1%
100.0%

Communication Services

5.7%

-

Energy

3.3%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.7%

-

Healthcare

2.5%

-

Utilities

2.0%

-

Real Estate

0.9%

-

Technology

EEM
43.6%
GDXJ

-

Financial Services

EEM
17.5%
GDXJ

-

Consumer Cyclical

EEM
8.1%
GDXJ

-

Industrials

EEM
6.2%
GDXJ

-

Basic Materials

EEM
6.1%
GDXJ
100.0%

Communication Services

EEM
5.7%
GDXJ

-

Energy

EEM
3.3%
GDXJ

-

Consumer Defensive

EEM
2.7%
GDXJ

-

Healthcare

EEM
2.5%
GDXJ

-

Utilities

EEM
2.0%
GDXJ

-

Real Estate

EEM
0.9%
GDXJ

-

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

EEM vs. GDXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEM
EEM Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

GDXJ
GDXJ Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
GDXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GDXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
GDXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
GDXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
GDXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EEM vs. GDXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ). 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.


EEMGDXJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.20

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.23

1.43

+1.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.20

3.72

+8.49

EEM vs. GDXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is higher than the GDXJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEM and GDXJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EEMGDXJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.07

1.00

+1.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.31

0.39

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

0.26

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.05

+0.32

Drawdowns

EEM vs. GDXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, smaller than the maximum GDXJ drawdown of -88.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and GDXJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EEMGDXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.43%

-88.66%

+22.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.52%

-35.60%

+22.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.29%

-35.60%

+18.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.49%

-50.99%

+13.50%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.82%

-57.77%

+17.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.13%

-34.94%

+27.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.01%

-60.48%

+44.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

13.67%

-10.09%

Volatility

EEM vs. GDXJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is 10.60%, while VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF (GDXJ) has a volatility of 17.66%. This indicates that EEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GDXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EEMGDXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.60%

17.66%

-7.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.87%

42.71%

-23.84%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.19%

50.84%

-29.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.16%

41.34%

-22.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.62%

44.15%

-23.53%

EEM vs. GDXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than GDXJ's 0.52% expense ratio.


Dividends

EEM vs. GDXJ - Dividend Comparison

EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, less than GDXJ's 2.61% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
1.85%2.22%2.43%2.63%2.50%1.99%1.45%2.76%2.24%1.89%1.89%2.49%
GDXJ
VanEck Junior Gold Miners ETF
2.61%2.33%2.61%0.72%0.51%1.78%1.58%0.39%0.45%0.03%4.78%0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


EEM and GDXJ have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GDXJ has higher volatility (17.66%) compared to EEM (10.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEM dropped -66.43% vs GDXJ's -88.66%.

On 10-year performance, GDXJ leads with 11.53% vs 9.37% for EEM. On fees, GDXJ is cheaper at 0.52% per year. On volatility, EEM has been the lower-risk option at 10.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GDXJ has performed better with a 11.53% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GDXJ is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

GDXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 1.85% for EEM.

EEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while GDXJ is Gold. EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net), while GDXJ tracks MVIS Global Junior Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for EEM and 0.52% for GDXJ.

EEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.00), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEM and GDXJ

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