GEMD vs. GSST

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GEMD (Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF) and GSST (Goldman Sachs Ultra Short 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 GSST is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs. GEMD is passively managed, while GSST is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GEMD returned 8.37%/yr vs 5.52%/yr for GSST. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GEMD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for GSST.

Performance

GEMD vs. GSST - 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 Ultra Short Bond ETF (GSST). 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 higher than GSST's 1.55% return.

GEMD

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

GSST

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.32%
• YTD: 1.55%
• 6M: 1.88%
• 1Y: 4.61%
• 3Y*: 5.52%
• 5Y*: 3.75%
• 10Y*: —

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

GEMD vs. GSST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	1.64%	13.67%	3.31%	8.51%	-15.70%
GSST Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.55%	5.20%	6.01%	6.08%	0.26%

Correlation

The correlation between GEMD and GSST is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2022	0.27

Return for Risk

GEMD vs. GSST — 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

GSST

GSST Risk / Return Rank: 99
GSST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
GSST Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
GSST Omega Ratio Rank: 99
GSST Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
GSST Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. GSST - 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 Ultra Short Bond ETF (GSST). 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	GSST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	7.98	-5.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	16.58	-13.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	3.94	-2.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	29.99	-27.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.09	185.54	-175.45
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. GSST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GEMD Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is lower than the GSST Sharpe Ratio of 7.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GEMD and GSST, 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	GSST	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	7.98	-5.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	5.99	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	3.78	-3.58

Drawdowns

GEMD vs. GSST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GEMD drawdown since its inception was -24.56%, which is greater than GSST's maximum drawdown of -3.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GEMD and GSST.

Drawdown Indicators

	GEMD	GSST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.56%	-3.51%	-21.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.64%	-0.15%	-4.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.69%	-0.25%	-7.44%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-1.19%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.43%	0.00%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.19%	-0.16%	-8.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.10%	0.02%	+1.08%

Volatility

GEMD vs. GSST - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF (GEMD) has a higher volatility of 1.84% compared to Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF (GSST) at 0.13%. This indicates that GEMD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GEMD	GSST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.84%	0.13%	+1.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.40%	0.41%	+3.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.53%	0.58%	+4.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.95%	0.63%	+9.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.95%	0.86%	+9.09%

GEMD vs. GSST - Expense Ratio Comparison

GEMD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than GSST's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

GEMD vs. GSST - Dividend Comparison

GEMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.69%, more than GSST's 4.32% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GEMD Goldman Sachs Access Emerging Markets USD Bond ETF	5.69%	6.32%	5.79%	5.70%	5.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GSST Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.32%	4.56%	5.45%	4.98%	1.97%	0.71%	1.12%	1.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GEMD and GSST in my portfolio?

GEMD and GSST have a correlation of 0.29, 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 GSST?

GEMD has higher volatility (1.84%) compared to GSST (0.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GEMD dropped -24.56% vs GSST's -3.51%.

Which ETF is better, GEMD or GSST?

On 3-year performance, GEMD leads with 8.37% vs 5.52% for GSST. On fees, GSST is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, GSST has been the lower-risk option at 0.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GEMD or GSST?

Over the 3-year period, GEMD has performed better with a 8.37% return vs 5.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GEMD or GSST?

GSST is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GEMD.

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

GEMD has the higher dividend yield at 5.69%, compared with 4.32% for GSST.

What is the main difference between GEMD and GSST?

GEMD is categorized as Emerging Markets Bonds, while GSST is Ultrashort Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GEMD and 0.16% for GSST.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.98 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.