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

Performance

GEM vs. EMIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF). 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 27.56% return, which is significantly higher than EMIF's 1.74% return. Over the past 10 years, GEM has outperformed EMIF with an annualized return of 10.00%, while EMIF has yielded a comparatively lower 2.36% annualized return.


GEM

1D
-1.04%
1M
9.44%
YTD
27.56%
6M
30.41%
1Y
54.83%
3Y*
23.85%
5Y*
7.91%
10Y*
10.00%

EMIF

1D
-1.54%
1M
-6.56%
YTD
1.74%
6M
0.79%
1Y
21.17%
3Y*
11.48%
5Y*
4.93%
10Y*
2.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GEM vs. EMIF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GEM
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF
27.56%33.43%6.66%11.82%-21.33%-0.19%13.23%17.79%-14.25%36.43%
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF
1.74%33.90%1.21%5.67%-12.59%3.76%-19.98%16.36%-13.70%20.70%

Correlation

The correlation between GEM and EMIF is 0.56, 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

0.56

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2015

0.70

The correlation between GEM and EMIF shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.70 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GEM vs. EMIF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GEM
EMIF

Financial Services

34.0%

-

Technology

14.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

13.0%

-

Basic Materials

8.7%

-

Industrials

7.5%
41.1%

Healthcare

5.4%

-

Communication Services

4.5%

-

Utilities

4.3%
40.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%

-

Real Estate

1.5%

-

Energy

1.3%
18.8%

Financial Services

GEM
34.0%
EMIF

-

Technology

GEM
14.1%
EMIF

-

Consumer Cyclical

GEM
13.0%
EMIF

-

Basic Materials

GEM
8.7%
EMIF

-

Industrials

GEM
7.5%
EMIF
41.1%

Healthcare

GEM
5.4%
EMIF

-

Communication Services

GEM
4.5%
EMIF

-

Utilities

GEM
4.3%
EMIF
40.1%

Consumer Defensive

GEM
4.2%
EMIF

-

Real Estate

GEM
1.5%
EMIF

-

Energy

GEM
1.3%
EMIF
18.8%

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. EMIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

GEM
GEM Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
GEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
GEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
GEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
GEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

EMIF
EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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. EMIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF). 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.


GEMEMIFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.26

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.08

1.71

+2.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.81

4.92

+10.89

GEM vs. EMIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the EMIF Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GEM and EMIF, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GEMEMIFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.82

1.38

+1.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.25

+0.20

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.12

+0.41

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

0.17

+0.36

Drawdowns

GEM vs. EMIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, smaller than the maximum EMIF drawdown of -48.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and EMIF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GEMEMIFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.02%

-48.02%

+11.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.50%

-12.45%

-1.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.54%

-16.70%

+0.16%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.43%

-23.68%

-11.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.02%

-48.02%

+11.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.04%

-12.45%

+11.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.01%

-15.91%

+3.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.48%

4.31%

-0.83%

Volatility

GEM vs. EMIF - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) has a higher volatility of 8.60% compared to iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) at 4.38%. This indicates that GEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMIF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GEMEMIFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.60%

4.38%

+4.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.96%

12.97%

+3.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.51%

15.41%

+4.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.70%

19.67%

-1.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.03%

20.61%

-1.58%

GEM vs. EMIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than EMIF's 0.75% expense ratio.


Dividends

GEM vs. EMIF - Dividend Comparison

GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%, less than EMIF's 4.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMIF
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF
4.87%4.96%4.12%2.64%3.08%3.94%2.54%2.07%2.64%2.58%3.16%2.07%
GEM
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF
1.80%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 EMIF have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GEM has higher volatility (8.60%) compared to EMIF (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs EMIF's -48.02%.

On 10-year performance, GEM leads with 10.00% vs 2.36% for EMIF. On fees, GEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. 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 10.00% return vs 2.36%. 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 0.75% for EMIF.

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.87%, compared with 1.80% for GEM.

GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.75% for EMIF.

GEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 1.38), 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 EMIF

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