PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMM vs. GSLC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMM vs. GSLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMM achieves a 32.97% return, which is significantly higher than GSLC's 8.50% return.


EMM

1D
-1.15%
1M
10.12%
YTD
32.97%
6M
38.50%
1Y
63.51%
3Y*
22.67%
5Y*
10Y*

GSLC

1D
-0.67%
1M
4.52%
YTD
8.50%
6M
8.90%
1Y
23.28%
3Y*
20.85%
5Y*
12.70%
10Y*
14.64%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMM vs. GSLC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
EMM
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF
32.97%30.21%2.34%3.40%
GSLC
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF
8.50%16.17%24.21%15.99%

Correlation

The correlation between EMM and GSLC is 0.70, 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

0.70

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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 16, 2023

0.68

The correlation between EMM and GSLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMM vs. GSLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
EMM
GSLC

Technology

45.5%
38.0%

Financial Services

25.0%
10.6%

Industrials

5.9%
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

5.1%
5.5%

Energy

4.8%
3.2%

Basic Materials

3.9%
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

2.7%
10.6%

Communication Services

2.7%
10.5%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.1%

Healthcare

1.5%
8.3%

Utilities

1.2%
2.4%

Technology

EMM
45.5%
GSLC
38.0%

Financial Services

EMM
25.0%
GSLC
10.6%

Industrials

EMM
5.9%
GSLC
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

EMM
5.1%
GSLC
5.5%

Energy

EMM
4.8%
GSLC
3.2%

Basic Materials

EMM
3.9%
GSLC
1.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EMM
2.7%
GSLC
10.6%

Communication Services

EMM
2.7%
GSLC
10.5%

Real Estate

EMM
1.8%
GSLC
1.1%

Healthcare

EMM
1.5%
GSLC
8.3%

Utilities

EMM
1.2%
GSLC
2.4%

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

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

EMM
EMM Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
EMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMM Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
EMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMM Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

GSLC
GSLC Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
GSLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GSLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
GSLC Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
GSLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
GSLC Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

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.


EMMGSLCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.36

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.33

2.46

+1.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.13

10.96

+7.17

EMM vs. GSLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMM Sharpe Ratio is 2.94, which is higher than the GSLC Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMM and GSLC, 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


EMMGSLCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.94

2.00

+0.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.17

0.82

+0.36

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


EMMGSLCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.15%

-0.67%

-0.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.68%

-4.39%

-0.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.51%

2.13%

+1.38%

Volatility

EMM vs. GSLC - Volatility Comparison

Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF (EMM) has a higher volatility of 9.79% compared to Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) at 2.74%. 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


EMMGSLCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.79%

2.74%

+7.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.28%

8.84%

+10.44%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.69%

11.72%

+9.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.83%

16.62%

+2.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.83%

17.68%

+1.15%

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 0.67%, less than GSLC's 0.93% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMM
Global X Emerging Markets ex-China ETF
0.67%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
0.93%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 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMM has higher volatility (9.79%) compared to GSLC (2.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMM dropped -21.99% vs GSLC's -33.69%.

On 3-year performance, EMM leads with 22.67% vs 20.85% for GSLC. On fees, GSLC is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GSLC has been the lower-risk option at 2.74%. 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 22.67% return vs 20.85%. 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 0.93%, compared with 0.67% 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 (2.94 vs 2.00), 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 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