EEMX vs. GLDM
EEMX (SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMX is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex Fossil Fuels Index, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EEMX returned 7.82%/yr vs 18.69%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EEMX charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.
Performance
EEMX vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EEMX achieves a 27.49% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 3.87% return.
EEMX
- 1D
- -1.13%
- 1M
- 6.59%
- YTD
- 27.49%
- 6M
- 30.63%
- 1Y
- 54.54%
- 3Y*
- 24.62%
- 5Y*
- 7.82%
- 10Y*
- —
GLDM
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- -1.62%
- YTD
- 3.87%
- 6M
- 6.41%
- 1Y
- 32.70%
- 3Y*
- 31.59%
- 5Y*
- 18.69%
- 10Y*
- —
EEMX vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMX SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF | 27.49% | 35.23% | 7.22% | 9.80% | -19.75% | -3.57% | 19.55% | 18.56% | -9.88% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 3.87% | 64.20% | 27.08% | 13.04% | -0.47% | -4.01% | 25.10% | 18.10% | 1.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between EEMX and GLDM is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018 | 0.23 |
The correlation between EEMX and GLDM shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (all time) to 0.35 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
EEMX vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EEMX
GLDM
Technology
-
Financial Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Industrials
-
Communication Services
-
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
-
Technology
EEMX
GLDM
-
Financial Services
EEMX
GLDM
-
Consumer Cyclical
EEMX
GLDM
-
Industrials
EEMX
GLDM
-
Communication Services
EEMX
GLDM
-
Basic Materials
EEMX
GLDM
Consumer Defensive
EEMX
GLDM
-
Healthcare
EEMX
GLDM
-
Utilities
EEMX
GLDM
-
Real Estate
EEMX
GLDM
-
Energy
EEMX
GLDM
-
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
EEMX vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank
EEMX
GLDM
EEMX vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF (EEMX) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). 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.
| EEMX | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.25 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.95 | 1.72 | +2.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.59 | 4.23 | +11.37 |
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
| EEMX | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.64 | 1.25 | +1.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.41 | 1.05 | -0.64 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 1.02 | -0.55 |
Drawdowns
EEMX vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EEMX drawdown since its inception was -39.90%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMX and GLDM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EEMX | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.90% | -21.63% | -18.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.89% | -19.14% | +5.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.64% | -19.14% | +1.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.08% | -20.92% | -16.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.43% | -16.95% | +14.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.73% | -6.22% | -8.51% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.51% | 7.76% | -4.25% |
Volatility
EEMX vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison
SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF (EEMX) has a higher volatility of 8.86% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 5.47%. This indicates that EEMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EEMX | GLDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.86% | 5.47% | +3.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.24% | 23.00% | -4.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.78% | 26.38% | -5.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.15% | 17.90% | +1.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.22% | 16.85% | +3.37% |
EEMX vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
EEMX has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
EEMX vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison
EEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EEMX SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Fossil Fuel Free ETF | 1.77% | 2.28% | 2.26% | 2.20% | 2.38% | 1.72% | 1.42% | 2.57% | 2.41% | 2.45% | 0.15% |
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EEMX and GLDM have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EEMX has higher volatility (8.86%) compared to GLDM (5.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EEMX dropped -39.90% vs GLDM's -21.63%.
On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 18.69% vs 7.82% for EEMX. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 5.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 18.69% return vs 7.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for EEMX.
EEMX has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.
EEMX is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while GLDM is Gold. EEMX tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex Fossil Fuels Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for EEMX and 0.10% for GLDM.
EEMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 1.25), 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 EEMX and GLDM
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