FSAMX vs. GLLSX
Compare and contrast key facts about Strategic Advisers Emerging Markets Fund (FSAMX) and abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX).
FSAMX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Sep 29, 2010. GLLSX is managed by Aberdeen. It was launched on Aug 29, 2000.
Performance
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSAMX Strategic Advisers Emerging Markets Fund | 1.25% | 34.09% | 8.34% | 11.94% | -22.32% | -2.15% | 20.39% | 21.87% | -17.13% | 38.40% |
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 5.47% | 34.81% | 0.73% | 21.35% | -23.04% | 36.50% | 15.93% | 23.64% | -11.50% | 23.06% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSAMX achieves a 1.25% return, which is significantly lower than GLLSX's 5.47% return. Over the past 10 years, FSAMX has underperformed GLLSX with an annualized return of 8.37%, while GLLSX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.57% annualized return.
FSAMX
- 1D
- -1.22%
- 1M
- -12.42%
- YTD
- 1.25%
- 6M
- 6.24%
- 1Y
- 31.93%
- 3Y*
- 15.98%
- 5Y*
- 3.91%
- 10Y*
- 8.37%
GLLSX
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- -13.34%
- YTD
- 5.47%
- 6M
- 15.81%
- 1Y
- 48.29%
- 3Y*
- 17.69%
- 5Y*
- 12.22%
- 10Y*
- 11.57%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FSAMX has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than GLLSX's 1.23% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
FSAMX vs. GLLSX — Risk / Return Rank
FSAMX
GLLSX
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strategic Advisers Emerging Markets Fund (FSAMX) 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.
| FSAMX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.73 | 2.46 | -0.73 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.35 | 3.02 | -0.67 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | 1.46 | -0.12 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.45 | 3.15 | -0.70 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.86 | 13.47 | -3.61 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FSAMX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.73 | 2.46 | -0.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.24 | 0.71 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.48 | 0.67 | -0.19 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 0.55 | -0.30 |
Correlation
The correlation between FSAMX and GLLSX is 0.80, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Dividend Comparison
FSAMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.35%, more than GLLSX's 1.78% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSAMX Strategic Advisers Emerging Markets Fund | 2.35% | 2.38% | 2.53% | 2.57% | 2.64% | 3.04% | 0.99% | 2.09% | 1.67% | 1.30% | 1.22% | 1.35% |
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund | 1.78% | 1.88% | 0.74% | 0.77% | 29.32% | 22.85% | 0.00% | 3.38% | 9.47% | 8.40% | 1.09% | 0.94% |
Drawdowns
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSAMX drawdown since its inception was -40.87%, which is greater than GLLSX's maximum drawdown of -32.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSAMX and GLLSX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSAMX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.87% | -32.59% | -8.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.04% | -14.39% | +1.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.64% | -30.02% | -8.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.87% | -32.59% | -8.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.04% | -14.39% | +1.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.04% | -7.99% | -6.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.53% | 3.36% | +0.17% |
Volatility
FSAMX vs. GLLSX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Strategic Advisers Emerging Markets Fund (FSAMX) is 8.20%, while abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a volatility of 10.78%. This indicates that FSAMX 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 graphics...
Volatility by Period
| FSAMX | GLLSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.20% | 10.78% | -2.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.91% | 15.60% | -2.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.61% | 19.51% | +0.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.06% | 17.21% | -0.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.72% | 17.34% | +0.38% |