PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GEM vs. BKEM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GEM vs. BKEM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and BNY Mellon Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BKEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

GEM vs. BKEM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
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

43.5%
43.0%

Financial Services

18.6%
16.9%

Consumer Cyclical

8.2%
8.7%

Communication Services

6.4%
5.8%

Basic Materials

6.4%
5.7%

Industrials

5.6%
8.1%

Energy

3.0%
3.4%

Healthcare

2.9%
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

2.8%
2.6%

Utilities

1.8%
2.0%

Real Estate

0.8%
1.1%

Technology

GEM
43.5%
BKEM
43.0%

Financial Services

GEM
18.6%
BKEM
16.9%

Consumer Cyclical

GEM
8.2%
BKEM
8.7%

Communication Services

GEM
6.4%
BKEM
5.8%

Basic Materials

GEM
6.4%
BKEM
5.7%

Industrials

GEM
5.6%
BKEM
8.1%

Energy

GEM
3.0%
BKEM
3.4%

Healthcare

GEM
2.9%
BKEM
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

GEM
2.8%
BKEM
2.6%

Utilities

GEM
1.8%
BKEM
2.0%

Real Estate

GEM
0.8%
BKEM
1.1%

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

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

GEM
GEM Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
GEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
GEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
GEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
GEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

BKEM
BKEM Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
BKEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BKEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
BKEM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
BKEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
BKEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


GEMBKEMDifference
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

GEM vs. BKEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the BKEM Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GEM and BKEM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


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


GEMBKEMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.91%

-9.06%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.94%

-15.81%

+3.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


GEMBKEMDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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