GEM vs. FRDM
GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and FRDM (Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while FRDM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GEM returned 7.91%/yr vs 19.30%/yr for FRDM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for FRDM.
Performance
GEM vs. FRDM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GEM achieves a 27.56% return, which is significantly lower than FRDM's 44.61% 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%
FRDM
- 1D
- -1.30%
- 1M
- 17.06%
- YTD
- 44.61%
- 6M
- 53.16%
- 1Y
- 97.46%
- 3Y*
- 37.08%
- 5Y*
- 19.30%
- 10Y*
- —
GEM vs. FRDM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 27.56% | 33.43% | 6.66% | 11.82% | -21.33% | -0.19% | 13.23% | 15.34% |
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF | 44.61% | 61.27% | 1.70% | 22.77% | -14.45% | 6.13% | 16.90% | 12.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between GEM and FRDM is 0.91, 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 | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2019 | 0.85 |
The correlation between GEM and FRDM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
GEM vs. FRDM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GEM
FRDM
Financial Services
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Industrials
Healthcare
Communication Services
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Energy
Financial Services
GEM
FRDM
Technology
GEM
FRDM
Consumer Cyclical
GEM
FRDM
Basic Materials
GEM
FRDM
Industrials
GEM
FRDM
Healthcare
GEM
FRDM
Communication Services
GEM
FRDM
Utilities
GEM
FRDM
Consumer Defensive
GEM
FRDM
Real Estate
GEM
FRDM
Energy
GEM
FRDM
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. FRDM — Risk / Return Rank
GEM
FRDM
GEM vs. FRDM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM). 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 | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.17 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.67 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.08 | 5.81 | -1.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.81 | 23.37 | -7.56 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GEM | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.82 | 4.00 | -1.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.45 | 0.93 | -0.48 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 0.85 | -0.33 |
Drawdowns
GEM vs. FRDM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, smaller than the maximum FRDM drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and FRDM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GEM | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.02% | -40.49% | +3.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.50% | -16.87% | +3.37% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.54% | -16.87% | +0.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.43% | -29.25% | -6.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.04% | -1.30% | +0.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.01% | -7.09% | -4.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.48% | 4.18% | -0.70% |
Volatility
GEM vs. FRDM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) is 8.60%, while Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF (FRDM) has a volatility of 11.03%. This indicates that GEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FRDM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GEM | FRDM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.60% | 11.03% | -2.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.96% | 21.65% | -4.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.51% | 24.50% | -4.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.70% | 20.80% | -3.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.03% | 22.77% | -3.74% |
GEM vs. FRDM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than FRDM's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
GEM vs. FRDM - Dividend Comparison
GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%, more than FRDM's 1.51% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FRDM Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF | 1.51% | 2.26% | 2.53% | 2.66% | 2.72% | 2.17% | 1.11% | 1.07% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
With a correlation of 0.91, GEM and FRDM 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.
FRDM has higher volatility (11.03%) compared to GEM (8.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs FRDM's -40.49%.
On 5-year performance, FRDM leads with 19.30% vs 7.91% for GEM. On fees, GEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, GEM has been the lower-risk option at 8.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FRDM has performed better with a 19.30% return vs 7.91%. 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 FRDM.
GEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 1.51% for FRDM.
GEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while FRDM is Emerging Markets Diversified. GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while FRDM tracks Life + Liberty Freedom 100 Emerging Markets Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Freedom Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.49% for FRDM.
FRDM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.00 vs 2.82), 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 FRDM
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