GEMD vs. GPIQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GEMD (Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income 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 GPIQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs. GEMD is passively managed, while GPIQ is actively managed. Over the past year, GEMD returned 11.06% vs 37.50% for GPIQ. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GEMD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for GPIQ.

Performance

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) and Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GEMD achieves a 1.64% return, which is significantly lower than GPIQ's 18.30% return.

GEMD

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 1.17%
• YTD: 1.64%
• 6M: 1.49%
• 1Y: 11.06%
• 3Y*: 8.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GPIQ

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 8.51%
• YTD: 18.30%
• 6M: 17.64%
• 1Y: 37.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.64%	13.67%	3.31%	10.99%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	18.30%	19.77%	23.22%	15.38%

Correlation

The correlation between GEMD and GPIQ is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2023	0.43

The correlation between GEMD and GPIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.50 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GEMD vs. GPIQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GEMD

GEMD Risk / Return Rank: 59
GEMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
GEMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
GEMD Omega Ratio Rank: 64
GEMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
GEMD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 81
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 82
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

GEMD vs. GPIQ - 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 Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ). 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.

	GEMD	GPIQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	2.81	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	3.71	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.51	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	3.96	-1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.09	17.48	-7.39
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GEMD Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is comparable to the GPIQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GEMD and GPIQ, 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

	GEMD	GPIQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	2.81	-0.80
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	1.78	-1.58

Drawdowns

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GEMD drawdown since its inception was -24.56%, which is greater than GPIQ's maximum drawdown of -21.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEMD and GPIQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GEMD	GPIQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.56%	-21.06%	-3.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.64%	-9.51%	+4.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.43%	-0.19%	-0.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.19%	-2.27%	-5.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.10%	2.15%	-1.05%

Volatility

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) is 1.84%, while Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) has a volatility of 3.39%. This indicates that GEMD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GPIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GEMD	GPIQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.84%	3.39%	-1.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.40%	10.44%	-6.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.53%	13.40%	-7.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.95%	17.47%	-7.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.95%	17.47%	-7.52%

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GEMD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than GPIQ's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

GEMD vs. GPIQ - Dividend Comparison

GEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.69%, less than GPIQ's 9.32% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	5.69%	6.32%	5.79%	5.70%	5.42%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	9.32%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GEMD and GPIQ in my portfolio?

GEMD and GPIQ have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GEMD or GPIQ?

GPIQ has higher volatility (3.39%) compared to GEMD (1.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEMD dropped -24.56% vs GPIQ's -21.06%.

Which ETF is better, GEMD or GPIQ?

On 1-year performance, GPIQ leads with 37.50% vs 11.06% for GEMD. On fees, GPIQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, GEMD has been the lower-risk option at 1.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GEMD or GPIQ?

Over the 1-year period, GPIQ has performed better with a 37.50% return vs 11.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GEMD or GPIQ?

GPIQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GEMD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GEMD or GPIQ?

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.32%, compared with 5.69% for GEMD.

What is the main difference between GEMD and GPIQ?

GEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while GPIQ is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GEMD and 0.29% for GPIQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GPIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 2.01), 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.