GEM vs. EEMO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and EEMO (Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while EEMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P Momentum Emerging Plus LargeMidCap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GEM returned 9.79%/yr vs 8.50%/yr for EEMO. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.31%/yr for EEMO.

Performance

GEM vs. EEMO - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GEM achieves a 26.12% return, which is significantly lower than EEMO's 36.85% return. Over the past 10 years, GEM has outperformed EEMO with an annualized return of 9.79%, while EEMO has yielded a comparatively lower 8.50% annualized return.

GEM

• 1D: -1.13%
• 1M: 6.24%
• YTD: 26.12%
• 6M: 29.03%
• 1Y: 50.97%
• 3Y*: 23.48%
• 5Y*: 7.67%
• 10Y*: 9.79%

EEMO

• 1D: -2.42%
• 1M: 10.83%
• YTD: 36.85%
• 6M: 37.37%
• 1Y: 51.13%
• 3Y*: 24.00%
• 5Y*: 6.67%
• 10Y*: 8.50%

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

GEM vs. EEMO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF	26.12%	33.43%	6.66%	11.82%	-21.33%	-0.19%	13.23%	17.79%	-14.25%	36.43%
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	36.85%	10.99%	9.88%	13.90%	-18.73%	-5.57%	9.66%	21.17%	-17.24%	49.65%

Correlation

The correlation between GEM and EEMO is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2015	0.76

The correlation between GEM and EEMO shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (all time) to 0.89 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GEM vs. EEMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GEM	EEMO
Financial Services	34.0%	18.0%
Technology	14.1%	43.8%
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	3.2%
Basic Materials	8.7%	12.9%
Industrials	7.5%	11.5%
Healthcare	5.4%	3.0%
Communication Services	4.5%	1.5%
Utilities	4.3%	2.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	1.2%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.5%
Energy	1.3%	2.5%

Return for Risk

GEM vs. EEMO — Risk / Return Rank

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

GEM

GEM Risk / Return Rank: 79
GEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
GEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
GEM Omega Ratio Rank: 80
GEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
GEM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

EEMO

EEMO Risk / Return Rank: 69
EEMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
EEMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
EEMO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
EEMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
EEMO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. EEMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO). 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.

	GEM	EEMO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	2.09	+0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	2.97	+0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.42	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.80	3.48	+0.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.69	13.93	+0.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GEM vs. EEMO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the EEMO Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GEM and EEMO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GEM	EEMO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63	2.09	+0.53
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44	0.35	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.39	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.52	0.13	+0.40

Drawdowns

GEM vs. EEMO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, smaller than the maximum EEMO drawdown of -48.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and EEMO.

Drawdown Indicators

	GEM	EEMO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.02%	-48.47%	+11.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.50%	-14.75%	+1.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.54%	-26.06%	+9.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.43%	-34.03%	-1.40%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.02%	-46.57%	+9.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.16%	-3.71%	+1.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.01%	-20.17%	+8.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	3.68%	-0.20%

Volatility

GEM vs. EEMO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) is 8.61%, while Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF (EEMO) has a volatility of 14.18%. This indicates that GEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GEM	EEMO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.61%	14.18%	-5.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.01%	22.26%	-5.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.55%	24.58%	-5.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.71%	19.36%	-1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.03%	21.59%	-2.56%

GEM vs. EEMO - Expense Ratio Comparison

GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than EEMO's 0.31% expense ratio.

Dividends

GEM vs. EEMO - Dividend Comparison

GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.83%, more than EEMO's 1.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EEMO Invesco S&P Emerging Markets Momentum ETF	1.68%	2.31%	2.57%	3.65%	3.82%	1.51%	1.53%	2.13%	13.10%	5.13%	1.55%	2.92%
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF	1.83%	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

Can I hold both GEM and EEMO in my portfolio?

GEM and EEMO have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GEM or EEMO?

EEMO has higher volatility (14.18%) compared to GEM (8.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs EEMO's -48.47%.

Which ETF is better, GEM or EEMO?

On 10-year performance, GEM leads with 9.79% vs 8.50% for EEMO. On fees, EEMO is cheaper at 0.31% per year. On volatility, GEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GEM or EEMO?

Over the 10-year period, GEM has performed better with a 9.79% return vs 8.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GEM or EEMO?

EEMO is cheaper with a 0.31% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for GEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GEM or EEMO?

GEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.83%, compared with 1.68% for EEMO.

What is the main difference between GEM and EEMO?

GEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EEMO is Momentum. GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while EEMO tracks S&P Momentum Emerging Plus LargeMidCap Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.31% for EEMO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.09), 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.