GEM vs. RNEM
GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) and RNEM (First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - GEM tracks the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index while RNEM tracks the Nasdaq Riskalyze Emerging Markets Equity Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GEM returned 7.00%/yr vs 4.79%/yr for RNEM. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GEM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RNEM.
Performance
GEM vs. RNEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GEM achieves a 18.38% return, which is significantly higher than RNEM's 0.25% 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%
RNEM
- 1D
- -1.44%
- 1M
- -0.16%
- 6M
- -1.96%
- YTD
- 0.25%
- 1Y
- 2.60%
- 3Y*
- 6.03%
- 5Y*
- 4.79%
- 10Y*
- —
GEM vs. RNEM - 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% | 16.10% |
RNEM First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF | 0.25% | 15.58% | -1.47% | 23.43% | -8.75% | 6.16% | -8.16% | 12.76% | -9.34% | 11.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between GEM and RNEM is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2017 | 0.71 |
The correlation between GEM and RNEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
GEM vs. RNEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GEM
RNEM
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Industrials
Energy
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
GEM
RNEM
Financial Services
GEM
RNEM
Consumer Cyclical
GEM
RNEM
Communication Services
GEM
RNEM
Basic Materials
GEM
RNEM
Industrials
GEM
RNEM
Energy
GEM
RNEM
Healthcare
GEM
RNEM
Consumer Defensive
GEM
RNEM
Utilities
GEM
RNEM
Real Estate
GEM
RNEM
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. RNEM — Risk / Return Rank
GEM
RNEM
GEM vs. RNEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) and First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM). 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 | RNEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.05 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.65 | 0.24 | +2.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.17 | 0.65 | +8.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GEM vs. RNEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GEM drawdown since its inception was -37.02%, roughly equal to the maximum RNEM drawdown of -38.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEM and RNEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GEM | RNEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.02% | -38.38% | +1.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.50% | -10.71% | -2.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.54% | -13.09% | -3.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.72% | -21.41% | -12.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.91% | -5.81% | -3.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.94% | -9.26% | -2.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.89% | 3.99% | -0.10% |
Volatility
GEM vs. RNEM - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) has a higher volatility of 10.78% compared to First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM) at 3.75%. This indicates that GEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RNEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GEM | RNEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.78% | 3.75% | +7.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.92% | 10.93% | +9.99% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.91% | 12.51% | +10.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.50% | 14.48% | +4.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.25% | 17.18% | +2.07% |
GEM vs. RNEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GEM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than RNEM's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
GEM vs. RNEM - Dividend Comparison
GEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than RNEM's 2.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
RNEM First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF | 2.37% | 2.75% | 3.45% | 1.63% | 2.99% | 3.20% | 3.01% | 2.85% | 2.85% | 2.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GEM and RNEM have a correlation of 0.76, 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 RNEM (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEM dropped -37.02% vs RNEM's -38.38%.
On 5-year performance, GEM leads with 7.00% vs 4.79% for RNEM. On fees, GEM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, RNEM has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. 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 4.79%. 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 RNEM.
RNEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.37%, compared with 1.94% for GEM.
GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index, while RNEM tracks Nasdaq Riskalyze Emerging Markets Equity Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for GEM and 0.75% for RNEM.
GEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 0.21), 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 RNEM
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