FPADX vs. GLLSX
FPADX (Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund) and GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 10 years, FPADX returned 10.60%/yr vs 15.51%/yr for GLLSX. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FPADX charges 0.07%/yr vs 1.23%/yr for GLLSX.
Performance
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FPADX achieves a 29.97% return, which is significantly lower than GLLSX's 49.19% return. Over the past 10 years, FPADX has underperformed GLLSX with an annualized return of 10.60%, while GLLSX has yielded a comparatively higher 15.51% annualized return.
FPADX
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 7.56%
- YTD
- 29.97%
- 6M
- 31.22%
- 1Y
- 54.93%
- 3Y*
- 24.86%
- 5Y*
- 8.23%
- 10Y*
- 10.60%
GLLSX
- 1D
- 0.71%
- 1M
- 10.25%
- YTD
- 49.19%
- 6M
- 51.55%
- 1Y
- 86.84%
- 3Y*
- 29.67%
- 5Y*
- 18.47%
- 10Y*
- 15.51%
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FPADX Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund | 29.97% | 33.90% | 6.80% | 9.51% | -20.06% | -3.07% | 17.84% | 18.28% | -14.65% | 35.16% |
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 49.19% | 34.81% | 0.73% | 21.35% | -23.04% | 36.50% | 15.93% | 23.64% | -11.50% | 23.06% |
Correlation
The correlation between FPADX and GLLSX is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2012 | 0.81 |
The correlation between FPADX and GLLSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.92 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FPADX vs. GLLSX — Risk / Return Rank
FPADX
GLLSX
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund (FPADX) and abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX). 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.
| FPADX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.66 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.22 | 6.08 | -1.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.86 | 22.81 | -6.95 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FPADX drawdown since its inception was -39.16%, which is greater than GLLSX's maximum drawdown of -32.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPADX and GLLSX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FPADX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.16% | -32.59% | -6.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.28% | -14.39% | +1.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.09% | -20.95% | +4.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.86% | -30.02% | -6.84% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.16% | -32.59% | -6.57% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.06% | 0.00% | -0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.22% | -7.91% | -5.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.52% | 3.83% | -0.31% |
Volatility
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund (FPADX) is 10.85%, while abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a volatility of 13.51%. This indicates that FPADX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLLSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FPADX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.85% | 13.51% | -2.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.16% | 22.41% | -4.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.17% | 24.46% | -4.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.63% | 18.85% | -1.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.05% | 18.17% | -0.12% |
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FPADX has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than GLLSX's 1.23% expense ratio.
Dividends
FPADX vs. GLLSX - Dividend Comparison
FPADX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than GLLSX's 1.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FPADX Fidelity Emerging Markets Index Fund | 1.81% | 2.35% | 2.70% | 2.68% | 2.47% | 2.14% | 1.50% | 2.59% | 2.20% | 0.12% | 1.69% | 2.47% |
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 1.26% | 1.88% | 0.74% | 0.77% | 29.32% | 22.85% | 0.00% | 3.38% | 9.47% | 8.40% | 1.09% | 0.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, FPADX and GLLSX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
GLLSX has higher volatility (13.51%) compared to FPADX (10.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPADX dropped -39.16% vs GLLSX's -32.59%.
GLLSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.58 vs 2.78), 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 FPADX and GLLSX
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