GEM vs. EDIV
GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and EDIV (SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - GEM tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index while EDIV tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GEM returned 8.54%/yr vs 8.47%/yr for EDIV. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EDIV.
Performance
GEM vs. EDIV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GEM achieves a 18.38% return, which is significantly higher than EDIV's 8.78% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GEM having a 8.54% annualized return and EDIV not far behind at 8.47%.
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%
EDIV
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- 0.94%
- 6M
- 6.78%
- YTD
- 8.78%
- 1Y
- 13.22%
- 3Y*
- 16.68%
- 5Y*
- 11.94%
- 10Y*
- 8.47%
GEM vs. EDIV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 18.38% | 33.43% | 6.66% | 11.82% | -21.33% | -0.19% | 13.23% | 17.79% | -14.25% | 36.43% |
EDIV SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF | 8.78% | 16.45% | 12.75% | 41.91% | -15.31% | 11.21% | -9.95% | 11.80% | -6.16% | 28.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between GEM and EDIV is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2015 | 0.84 |
The correlation between GEM and EDIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
GEM vs. EDIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GEM
EDIV
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
GEM
EDIV
Financial Services
GEM
EDIV
Consumer Cyclical
GEM
EDIV
Communication Services
GEM
EDIV
Basic Materials
GEM
EDIV
Industrials
GEM
EDIV
Energy
GEM
EDIV
Healthcare
GEM
EDIV
Consumer Defensive
GEM
EDIV
Utilities
GEM
EDIV
Real Estate
GEM
EDIV
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. EDIV — Risk / Return Rank
GEM
EDIV
GEM vs. EDIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV). 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 | EDIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.19 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.65 | 1.28 | +1.37 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.17 | 3.74 | +5.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GEM vs. EDIV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, smaller than the maximum EDIV drawdown of -53.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and EDIV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GEM | EDIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.02% | -53.36% | +16.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.50% | -10.36% | -3.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.54% | -13.84% | -2.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.72% | -28.32% | -5.40% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.02% | -40.76% | +3.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.91% | -1.94% | -6.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.94% | -19.25% | +7.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 3.54% | +0.35% |
Volatility
GEM vs. EDIV - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) has a higher volatility of 10.78% compared to SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF (EDIV) at 4.62%. This indicates that GEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GEM | EDIV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.78% | 4.62% | +6.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.92% | 11.03% | +9.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.91% | 12.79% | +10.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.50% | 13.94% | +4.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.25% | 17.31% | +1.94% |
GEM vs. EDIV - Expense Ratio Comparison
GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EDIV's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
GEM vs. EDIV - Dividend Comparison
GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than EDIV's 4.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDIV SPDR S&P Emerging Markets Dividend ETF | 4.17% | 4.69% | 3.94% | 4.26% | 4.94% | 3.84% | 3.52% | 3.83% | 3.41% | 2.99% | 4.94% | 5.33% |
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
GEM and EDIV have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GEM has higher volatility (10.78%) compared to EDIV (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs EDIV's -53.36%.
On 10-year performance, GEM leads with 8.54% vs 8.47% for EDIV. On fees, GEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EDIV has been the lower-risk option at 4.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, GEM has performed better with a 8.54% return vs 8.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GEM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EDIV.
EDIV has the higher dividend yield at 4.17%, compared with 1.94% for GEM.
GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while EDIV tracks S&P Emerging Markets Dividend Opportunities Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.49% for EDIV.
GEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.04), 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 EDIV
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