EEMO vs. GMF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EEMO (Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF) and GMF (SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P Momentum Emerging Plus LargeMidCap Index, while GMF is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEMO returned 8.50%/yr vs 10.11%/yr for GMF. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEMO charges 0.31%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GMF.

Performance

EEMO vs. GMF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) and SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMO achieves a 36.85% return, which is significantly higher than GMF's 13.96% return. Over the past 10 years, EEMO has underperformed GMF with an annualized return of 8.50%, while GMF has yielded a comparatively higher 10.11% annualized return.

EEMO

• 1D: -2.42%
• 1M: 10.83%
• YTD: 36.85%
• 6M: 37.37%
• 1Y: 51.13%
• 3Y*: 24.00%
• 5Y*: 6.67%
• 10Y*: 8.50%

GMF

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 4.32%
• YTD: 13.96%
• 6M: 14.78%
• 1Y: 31.46%
• 3Y*: 19.48%
• 5Y*: 5.49%
• 10Y*: 10.11%

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

EEMO vs. GMF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	36.85%	10.99%	9.88%	13.90%	-18.73%	-5.57%	9.66%	21.17%	-17.24%	49.65%
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	13.96%	21.99%	16.55%	8.20%	-18.99%	-1.93%	24.96%	19.92%	-14.25%	41.71%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMO and GMF 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2012	0.67

The correlation between EEMO and GMF shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (all time) to 0.84 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EEMO vs. GMF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EEMO	GMF
Technology	43.8%	37.7%
Financial Services	18.0%	11.9%
Basic Materials	12.9%	3.7%
Industrials	11.5%	4.6%
Consumer Cyclical	3.2%	8.9%
Healthcare	3.0%	2.1%
Energy	2.5%	1.5%
Utilities	2.0%	0.9%
Communication Services	1.5%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.2%	1.7%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.6%

Return for Risk

EEMO vs. GMF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EEMO

EEMO Risk / Return Rank: 69
EEMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
EEMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
EEMO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
EEMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
EEMO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

GMF

GMF Risk / Return Rank: 56
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 57
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

EEMO vs. GMF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) and SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF). 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.

	EEMO	GMF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	1.92	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	2.72	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.35	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.48	2.50	+0.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.93	9.27	+4.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EEMO vs. GMF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMO Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the GMF Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMO and GMF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EEMO	GMF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.09	1.92	+0.18
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.30	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.39	0.53	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	0.30	-0.17

Drawdowns

EEMO vs. GMF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMO drawdown since its inception was -48.47%, smaller than the maximum GMF drawdown of -67.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMO and GMF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EEMO	GMF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.47%	-67.18%	+18.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.75%	-12.62%	-2.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.06%	-21.43%	-4.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.03%	-35.76%	+1.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.57%	-40.18%	-6.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.71%	-1.01%	-2.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.17%	-16.59%	-3.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.68%	3.40%	+0.28%

Volatility

EEMO vs. GMF - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) has a higher volatility of 14.18% compared to SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) at 6.11%. This indicates that EEMO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EEMO	GMF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.18%	6.11%	+8.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.26%	13.65%	+8.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.58%	16.50%	+8.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.36%	18.52%	+0.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.59%	19.19%	+2.40%

EEMO vs. GMF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMO has a 0.31% expense ratio, which is lower than GMF's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMO vs. GMF - Dividend Comparison

EEMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than GMF's 1.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	1.68%	2.31%	2.57%	3.65%	3.82%	1.51%	1.53%	2.13%	13.10%	5.13%	1.55%	2.92%
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	1.31%	1.49%	1.92%	2.75%	2.54%	2.71%	1.32%	1.75%	2.26%	1.70%	2.49%	3.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EEMO and GMF in my portfolio?

EEMO and GMF 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.

Which is riskier, EEMO or GMF?

EEMO has higher volatility (14.18%) compared to GMF (6.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMO dropped -48.47% vs GMF's -67.18%.

Which ETF is better, EEMO or GMF?

On 10-year performance, GMF leads with 10.11% vs 8.50% for EEMO. On fees, EEMO is cheaper at 0.31% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 6.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EEMO or GMF?

Over the 10-year period, GMF has performed better with a 10.11% return vs 8.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EEMO or GMF?

EEMO is cheaper with a 0.31% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GMF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EEMO or GMF?

EEMO has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 1.31% for GMF.

What is the main difference between EEMO and GMF?

EEMO is categorized as Momentum, while GMF is Asia Pacific Equities. EEMO tracks S&P Momentum Emerging Plus LargeMidCap Index, while GMF tracks S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.31% for EEMO and 0.49% for GMF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EEMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.92), 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.