GLLSX vs. CEMIX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) and CEMIX (Causeway Emerging Markets Fund) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, GLLSX returned 13.41%/yr vs 10.33%/yr for CEMIX. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GLLSX charges 1.23%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for CEMIX.

Performance

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) and Causeway Emerging Markets Fund (CEMIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLLSX achieves a 31.84% return, which is significantly higher than CEMIX's 22.56% return. Over the past 10 years, GLLSX has outperformed CEMIX with an annualized return of 13.41%, while CEMIX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.33% annualized return.

GLLSX

• 1D: 2.81%
• 1M: -3.28%
• 6M: 18.04%
• YTD: 31.84%
• 1Y: 59.51%
• 3Y*: 23.01%
• 5Y*: 14.65%
• 10Y*: 13.41%
• ALL TIME*: 10.44%

CEMIX

• 1D: 2.31%
• 1M: -2.21%
• 6M: 13.96%
• YTD: 22.56%
• 1Y: 43.82%
• 3Y*: 25.05%
• 5Y*: 10.79%
• 10Y*: 10.33%
• ALL TIME*: 6.93%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CEMIX Causeway Emerging Markets Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	31.84%	34.81%	0.73%	21.35%	-23.04%	36.50%	15.93%	23.64%	-11.50%	23.06%
CEMIX Causeway Emerging Markets Fund	22.56%	36.22%	14.90%	17.13%	-23.05%	-0.83%	16.95%	16.73%	-17.91%	39.79%

Correlation

The correlation between GLLSX and CEMIX is 0.84, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2012	0.78

The correlation between GLLSX and CEMIX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLLSX vs. CEMIX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GLLSX

GLLSX Risk / Return Rank: 82
GLLSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
GLLSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
GLLSX Omega Ratio Rank: 81
GLLSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
GLLSX Martin Ratio Rank: 86

CEMIX

CEMIX Risk / Return Rank: 63
CEMIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CEMIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
CEMIX Omega Ratio Rank: 63
CEMIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
CEMIX Martin Ratio Rank: 65

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) and Causeway Emerging Markets Fund (CEMIX). 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.

	GLLSX	CEMIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.07	1.60	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	2.05	+0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.30	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	2.58	+0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.37	8.80	+2.57

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLLSX Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the CEMIX Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLLSX and CEMIX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLLSX drawdown since its inception was -32.59%, smaller than the maximum CEMIX drawdown of -68.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLLSX and CEMIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLLSX	CEMIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.59%	-68.90%	+36.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.34%	-16.30%	-2.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.95%	-17.92%	-3.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.02%	-33.95%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.59%	-39.59%	+7.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.63%	-10.60%	-1.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.92%	-15.72%	+7.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.13%	4.76%	+0.37%

Volatility

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a higher volatility of 12.59% compared to Causeway Emerging Markets Fund (CEMIX) at 11.70%. This indicates that GLLSX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEMIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLLSX	CEMIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.59%	11.70%	+0.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.61%	24.24%	+2.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.27%	26.37%	+1.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.90%	19.20%	+0.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.64%	19.06%	-0.42%

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLLSX has a 1.23% expense ratio, which is higher than CEMIX's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLLSX vs. CEMIX - Dividend Comparison

GLLSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than CEMIX's 2.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CEMIX Causeway Emerging Markets Fund	2.04%	2.49%	3.73%	4.85%	4.87%	23.35%	1.36%	2.03%	2.01%	1.58%	1.55%	1.69%
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	1.42%	1.88%	0.74%	0.77%	29.32%	22.85%	0.00%	3.38%	9.47%	8.40%	1.09%	0.94%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLLSX and CEMIX in my portfolio?

GLLSX and CEMIX have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLLSX or CEMIX?

GLLSX has higher volatility (12.59%) compared to CEMIX (11.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLLSX dropped -32.59% vs CEMIX's -68.90%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLLSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.60), 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.