EMM vs. GSLC
EMM (Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF) and GSLC (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Global X, while GSLC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index. EMM is actively managed, while GSLC is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EMM returned 21.97%/yr vs 19.26%/yr for GSLC. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EMM charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for GSLC.
Performance
EMM vs. GSLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 30.43% return, which is significantly higher than GSLC's 5.86% return.
EMM
- 1D
- -5.60%
- 1M
- 4.22%
- YTD
- 30.43%
- 6M
- 33.87%
- 1Y
- 55.00%
- 3Y*
- 21.97%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSLC
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- -1.29%
- YTD
- 5.86%
- 6M
- 4.87%
- 1Y
- 19.37%
- 3Y*
- 19.26%
- 5Y*
- 11.78%
- 10Y*
- 14.65%
EMM vs. GSLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 30.43% | 30.21% | 2.34% | 2.99% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 5.86% | 16.17% | 24.21% | 16.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMM and GSLC is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2023 | 0.68 |
The correlation between EMM and GSLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
EMM vs. GSLC — Risk / Return Rank
EMM
GSLC
EMM vs. GSLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). 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.
| EMM | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.67 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.29 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.75 | 2.05 | +1.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.03 | 8.86 | +6.17 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EMM vs. GSLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMM drawdown since its inception was -21.99%, smaller than the maximum GSLC drawdown of -33.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMM and GSLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMM | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.99% | -33.69% | +11.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.75% | -9.49% | -5.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.99% | -18.66% | -3.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.90% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.60% | -3.08% | -2.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.67% | -4.38% | -0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.67% | 2.19% | +1.48% |
Volatility
EMM vs. GSLC - Volatility Comparison
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a higher volatility of 13.10% compared to Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) at 4.60%. This indicates that EMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMM | GSLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 13.10% | 4.60% | +8.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.46% | 9.67% | +12.79% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.51% | 12.28% | +12.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.83% | 16.71% | +3.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.83% | 17.70% | +2.13% |
EMM vs. GSLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMM has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than GSLC's 0.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMM vs. GSLC - Dividend Comparison
EMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, less than GSLC's 0.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMM Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF | 0.69% | 0.90% | 0.80% | 0.66% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GSLC Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF | 0.95% | 1.00% | 1.11% | 1.38% | 1.61% | 1.06% | 1.35% | 1.54% | 1.89% | 1.69% | 1.69% | 0.36% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EMM and GSLC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMM has higher volatility (13.10%) compared to GSLC (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMM dropped -21.99% vs GSLC's -33.69%.
On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 21.97% vs 19.26% for GSLC. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GSLC has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, EMM has performed better with a 21.97% return vs 19.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GSLC is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMM.
GSLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.69% for EMM.
EMM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while GSLC is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMM and 0.09% for GSLC.
EMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 1.59), 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 EMM and GSLC
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