GBIL vs. IEMG
GBIL (Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF) and IEMG (iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index, while IEMG is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GBIL returned 3.42%/yr vs 6.77%/yr for IEMG. Their -0.01 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. GBIL charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for IEMG.
Performance
GBIL vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GBIL achieves a 1.90% return, which is significantly lower than IEMG's 15.55% return.
GBIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.29%
- 6M
- 1.70%
- YTD
- 1.90%
- 1Y
- 3.77%
- 3Y*
- 4.57%
- 5Y*
- 3.42%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.30%
IEMG
- 1D
- -1.78%
- 1M
- -6.23%
- 6M
- 7.28%
- YTD
- 15.55%
- 1Y
- 28.48%
- 3Y*
- 17.89%
- 5Y*
- 6.77%
- 10Y*
- 8.78%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.06%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $51.18M | $55.98M | $72.80M | |
| $959.90M | $1.12B | $1.07B |
GBIL vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 1.90% | 4.12% | 5.24% | 4.91% | 1.05% | -0.08% | 0.79% | 2.31% | 1.78% | 0.69% |
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 15.55% | 32.56% | 6.50% | 11.52% | -19.98% | -0.64% | 17.87% | 17.81% | -14.92% | 37.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBIL and IEMG is 0.02, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.02 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 8, 2016 | -0.01 |
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
GBIL vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank
GBIL
IEMG
GBIL vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.
| GBIL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +15.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +140.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 75.95 | 1.24 | +74.71 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 191.66 | 2.13 | +189.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2,147.30 | 6.72 | +2,140.58 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GBIL vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum IEMG drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBIL and IEMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBIL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.76% | -38.71% | +37.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.02% | -13.21% | +13.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.76% | -17.21% | +16.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.76% | -33.61% | +32.85% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -38.71% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -10.41% | +10.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.04% | -12.90% | +12.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.00% | 4.19% | -4.19% |
Volatility
GBIL vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) is 0.06%, while iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a volatility of 7.86%. This indicates that GBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBIL | IEMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.06% | 7.86% | -7.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.14% | 21.27% | -21.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.23% | 23.23% | -23.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.58% | 19.21% | -18.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.47% | 20.26% | -19.79% |
GBIL vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBIL has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is higher than IEMG's 0.09% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GBIL vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison
GBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%, more than IEMG's 2.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 3.71% | 4.02% | 4.93% | 4.77% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 2.20% | 1.70% | 0.74% | 0.11% | 0.00% |
IEMG iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | 2.33% | 2.75% | 3.20% | 2.89% | 2.71% | 3.06% | 1.87% | 3.15% | 2.76% | 2.35% | 2.28% | 2.53% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GBIL and IEMG have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IEMG has higher volatility (7.86%) compared to GBIL (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBIL dropped -0.76% vs IEMG's -38.71%.
On 5-year performance, IEMG leads with 6.77% vs 3.42% for GBIL. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IEMG has performed better with a 6.77% return vs 3.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for GBIL.
GBIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 2.33% for IEMG.
GBIL is categorized as Government Bonds, while IEMG is Emerging Markets Equities. GBIL tracks FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index, while IEMG tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GBIL and 0.09% for IEMG.
GBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.10 vs 1.21), 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 GBIL and IEMG
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