GEM vs. BKEM
GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and BKEM (BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - GEM tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index while BKEM tracks the Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GEM returned 7.00%/yr vs 6.39%/yr for BKEM. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. GEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for BKEM.
Performance
GEM vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GEM achieves a 18.38% return, which is significantly lower than BKEM's 20.10% return.
GEM
- 1D
- -3.47%
- 1M
- -4.39%
- 6M
- 12.13%
- YTD
- 18.38%
- 1Y
- 35.61%
- 3Y*
- 19.30%
- 5Y*
- 7.00%
- 10Y*
- 8.54%
BKEM
- 1D
- -3.63%
- 1M
- -4.84%
- 6M
- 13.52%
- YTD
- 20.10%
- 1Y
- 36.79%
- 3Y*
- 18.94%
- 5Y*
- 6.39%
- 10Y*
- —
GEM vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 18.38% | 33.43% | 6.66% | 11.82% | -21.33% | -0.19% | 41.49% |
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 20.10% | 30.55% | 7.53% | 8.68% | -19.43% | -3.91% | 48.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between GEM and BKEM is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 24, 2020 | 0.97 |
The correlation between GEM and BKEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.
GEM vs. BKEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GEM
BKEM
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
GEM
BKEM
Financial Services
GEM
BKEM
Consumer Cyclical
GEM
BKEM
Communication Services
GEM
BKEM
Basic Materials
GEM
BKEM
Industrials
GEM
BKEM
Energy
GEM
BKEM
Healthcare
GEM
BKEM
Consumer Defensive
GEM
BKEM
Utilities
GEM
BKEM
Real Estate
GEM
BKEM
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
GEM vs. BKEM — Risk / Return Rank
GEM
BKEM
GEM vs. BKEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). 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.
| GEM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.30 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.65 | 2.82 | -0.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.17 | 9.64 | -0.47 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GEM vs. BKEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, smaller than the maximum BKEM drawdown of -39.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and BKEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GEM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.02% | -39.48% | +2.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.50% | -13.11% | -0.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.54% | -18.38% | +1.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.72% | -34.52% | +0.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.91% | -9.06% | +0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.94% | -15.81% | +3.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 3.83% | +0.06% |
Volatility
GEM vs. BKEM - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM) have volatilities of 10.78% and 10.87%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GEM | BKEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.78% | 10.87% | -0.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.92% | 20.93% | -0.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.91% | 22.92% | -0.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.50% | 19.50% | -1.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.25% | 19.65% | -0.40% |
GEM vs. BKEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than BKEM's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
GEM vs. BKEM - Dividend Comparison
GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, which matches BKEM's 1.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BKEM BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.95% | 2.25% | 2.76% | 3.02% | 3.15% | 2.22% | 1.78% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.94% | 2.30% | 2.58% | 2.97% | 2.96% | 3.00% | 1.63% | 3.13% | 2.08% | 1.81% | 1.98% | 0.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, GEM and BKEM 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.
BKEM has higher volatility (10.87%) compared to GEM (10.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs BKEM's -39.48%.
On 5-year performance, GEM leads with 7.00% vs 6.39% for BKEM. On fees, BKEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GEM has performed better with a 7.00% return vs 6.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BKEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for GEM.
GEM and BKEM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.94%.
GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while BKEM tracks Morningstar Emerging Markets Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.11% for BKEM.
BKEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 1.56), 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 GEM and BKEM
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