FEMKX vs. GC=F

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FEMKX (Fidelity Emerging Markets) is Emerging Markets Equities fund managed by Fidelity, while GC=F (Gold Futures) is an asset. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

FEMKX vs. GC=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Emerging Markets (FEMKX) and Gold Futures (GC=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FEMKX

• 1D: 5.11%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: 21.74%
• 6M: 24.81%
• 1Y: 47.25%
• 3Y*: 20.93%
• 5Y*: 6.21%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

GC=F

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEMKX vs. GC=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FEMKX Fidelity Emerging Markets	21.74%	31.02%	7.12%	15.16%	-21.55%
GC=F Gold Futures	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	5.84%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMKX and GC=F is -0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2022	-0.04

Return for Risk

FEMKX vs. GC=F — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEMKX

FEMKX Risk / Return Rank: 79
FEMKX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
FEMKX Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FEMKX Omega Ratio Rank: 77
FEMKX Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
FEMKX Martin Ratio Rank: 83

GC=F

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

FEMKX vs. GC=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets (FEMKX) and Gold Futures (GC=F). 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.

	FEMKX	GC=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.46	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.40	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FEMKX	GC=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.14%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.00%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.13%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.88%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.05%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.93%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FEMKX	GC=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.94%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.90%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.23%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.38%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.91%	—	—

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEMKX and GC=F in my portfolio?

FEMKX and GC=F have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.