EMXC vs. GLDM

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) and GLDM (SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - EMXC is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while GLDM is a Gold fund tracking the LBMA Gold Price PM. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMXC returned 11.46%/yr vs 17.89%/yr for GLDM. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMXC charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for GLDM.

Performance

EMXC vs. GLDM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) and SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMXC achieves a 32.33% return, which is significantly higher than GLDM's 0.30% return.

EMXC

• 1D: 2.43%
• 1M: -1.88%
• YTD: 32.33%
• 6M: 36.39%
• 1Y: 62.72%
• 3Y*: 25.41%
• 5Y*: 11.46%
• 10Y*: —

GLDM

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: -8.41%
• YTD: 0.30%
• 6M: 3.19%
• 1Y: 30.55%
• 3Y*: 30.08%
• 5Y*: 17.89%
• 10Y*: —

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

EMXC vs. GLDM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	32.33%	35.14%	2.68%	18.96%	-19.56%	8.54%	12.76%	15.80%	-3.50%
GLDM SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust	0.30%	64.20%	27.08%	13.04%	-0.47%	-4.01%	25.10%	18.10%	1.84%

Correlation

The correlation between EMXC and GLDM is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2018	0.25

EMXC vs. GLDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMXC	GLDM
Technology	45.0%	-
Financial Services	19.6%	-
Industrials	8.3%	-
Basic Materials	6.8%	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	4.5%	-
Energy	4.2%	-
Communication Services	3.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	-
Utilities	2.3%	-
Healthcare	2.2%	-
Real Estate	1.0%	-

Return for Risk

EMXC vs. GLDM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMXC

EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 86
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 88
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 88

GLDM

GLDM Risk / Return Rank: 34
GLDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GLDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
GLDM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
GLDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
GLDM Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

EMXC vs. GLDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) 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.

	EMXC	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	1.15	+1.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.27	1.54	+1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.23	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	1.53	+2.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.27	3.85	+13.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EMXC vs. GLDM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMXC Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is higher than the GLDM Sharpe Ratio of 1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMXC and GLDM, 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

	EMXC	GLDM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.71	1.15	+1.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.65	1.00	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.99	-0.49

Drawdowns

EMXC vs. GLDM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMXC drawdown since its inception was -42.81%, which is greater than GLDM's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMXC and GLDM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMXC	GLDM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.81%	-21.63%	-21.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.41%	-20.00%	+5.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.12%	-20.00%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.91%	-20.92%	-7.99%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.55%	-19.80%	+12.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.19%	-6.24%	-3.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.64%	7.96%	-4.32%

Volatility

EMXC vs. GLDM - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a higher volatility of 12.57% compared to SPDR Gold MiniShares Trust (GLDM) at 5.65%. This indicates that EMXC'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.

Volatility by Period

	EMXC	GLDM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.57%	5.65%	+6.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.20%	23.31%	-2.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.27%	26.65%	-3.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.82%	17.98%	-0.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.99%	16.89%	+3.10%

EMXC vs. GLDM - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMXC has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDM's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMXC vs. GLDM - Dividend Comparison

EMXC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.13%, while GLDM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	2.13%	2.82%	2.69%	1.83%	2.85%	1.78%	1.45%	3.25%	2.63%	0.99%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMXC and GLDM in my portfolio?

EMXC and GLDM have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EMXC or GLDM?

EMXC has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to GLDM (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMXC dropped -42.81% vs GLDM's -21.63%.

Which ETF is better, EMXC or GLDM?

On 5-year performance, GLDM leads with 17.89% vs 11.46% for EMXC. On fees, GLDM is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, GLDM has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMXC or GLDM?

Over the 5-year period, GLDM has performed better with a 17.89% return vs 11.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMXC or GLDM?

GLDM is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMXC or GLDM?

EMXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.13%, compared with 0.00% for GLDM.

What is the main difference between EMXC and GLDM?

EMXC is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while GLDM is Gold. EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while GLDM tracks LBMA Gold Price PM. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EMXC and 0.10% for GLDM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 1.15), 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.