GEMD vs. BWZ
GEMD (Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and BWZ (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GEMD is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the FTSE Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets USD Bond Index - Benchmark TR Net, while BWZ is a International Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GEMD returned 8.15%/yr vs 2.03%/yr for BWZ. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GEMD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BWZ.
Performance
GEMD vs. BWZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GEMD achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly higher than BWZ's -1.98% return.
GEMD
- 1D
- -0.39%
- 1M
- 1.83%
- YTD
- 2.30%
- 6M
- 2.33%
- 1Y
- 11.10%
- 3Y*
- 8.15%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BWZ
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- YTD
- -1.98%
- 6M
- -1.95%
- 1Y
- -1.90%
- 3Y*
- 2.03%
- 5Y*
- -1.91%
- 10Y*
- -0.60%
GEMD vs. BWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 2.30% | 13.67% | 3.31% | 8.51% | -15.70% |
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | -1.98% | 10.47% | -5.31% | 2.97% | -10.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between GEMD and BWZ is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 17, 2022 | 0.49 |
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
GEMD vs. BWZ — Risk / Return Rank
GEMD
BWZ
GEMD vs. BWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ). 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.
| GEMD | BWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 0.96 | +0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.40 | -0.37 | +2.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.09 | -0.78 | +10.87 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GEMD vs. BWZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GEMD drawdown since its inception was -24.56%, smaller than the maximum BWZ drawdown of -34.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEMD and BWZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GEMD | BWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.56% | -34.23% | +9.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.64% | -5.15% | +0.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.69% | -8.60% | +0.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.39% | -23.46% | +23.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.09% | -16.12% | +8.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.10% | 2.42% | -1.32% |
Volatility
GEMD vs. BWZ - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) have volatilities of 1.81% and 1.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GEMD | BWZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.81% | 1.78% | +0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.60% | 5.11% | -0.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.68% | 6.86% | -1.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.92% | 7.60% | +2.32% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.92% | 6.95% | +2.97% |
GEMD vs. BWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
GEMD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than BWZ's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GEMD vs. BWZ - Dividend Comparison
GEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.65%, more than BWZ's 2.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.12% | 2.05% | 2.47% | 1.63% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 0.13% | 0.43% | 1.10% | 0.40% | 0.13% | 0.06% |
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF | 5.65% | 6.32% | 5.79% | 5.70% | 5.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GEMD and BWZ have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GEMD has higher volatility (1.81%) compared to BWZ (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEMD dropped -24.56% vs BWZ's -34.23%.
On 3-year performance, GEMD leads with 8.15% vs 2.03% for BWZ. On fees, BWZ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, GEMD has performed better with a 8.15% return vs 2.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BWZ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GEMD.
GEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.65%, compared with 2.12% for BWZ.
GEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while BWZ is International Government Bonds. GEMD tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Emerging Markets USD Bond Index - Benchmark TR Net, while BWZ tracks Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GEMD and 0.35% for BWZ.
GEMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.97 vs -0.28), 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 GEMD and BWZ
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