GLLSX vs. NOEMX

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) and NOEMX (Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 10 years, GLLSX returned 14.76%/yr vs 10.07%/yr for NOEMX. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GLLSX charges 1.23%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for NOEMX.

Performance

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLLSX achieves a 39.80% return, which is significantly higher than NOEMX's 23.91% return. Over the past 10 years, GLLSX has outperformed NOEMX with an annualized return of 14.76%, while NOEMX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.07% annualized return.

GLLSX

• 1D: -6.29%
• 1M: 3.31%
• YTD: 39.80%
• 6M: 41.56%
• 1Y: 70.27%
• 3Y*: 26.89%
• 5Y*: 16.79%
• 10Y*: 14.76%

NOEMX

• 1D: -4.92%
• 1M: 2.16%
• YTD: 23.91%
• 6M: 24.52%
• 1Y: 47.74%
• 3Y*: 22.88%
• 5Y*: 6.89%
• 10Y*: 10.07%

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

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	39.80%	34.81%	0.73%	21.35%	-23.04%	36.50%	15.93%	23.64%	-11.50%	23.06%
NOEMX Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund	23.91%	33.67%	7.10%	9.20%	-20.53%	-3.36%	17.63%	18.32%	-15.04%	37.34%

Correlation

The correlation between GLLSX and NOEMX is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2012	0.80

The correlation between GLLSX and NOEMX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GLLSX vs. NOEMX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GLLSX

GLLSX Risk / Return Rank: 90
GLLSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
GLLSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
GLLSX Omega Ratio Rank: 88
GLLSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
GLLSX Martin Ratio Rank: 95

NOEMX

NOEMX Risk / Return Rank: 83
NOEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
NOEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
NOEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 83
NOEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
NOEMX 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.

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) and Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (NOEMX). 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	NOEMX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.99	2.58	+0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.42	3.20	+0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.48	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.25	3.75	+1.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.58	13.81	+5.77

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLLSX Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is comparable to the NOEMX Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLLSX and NOEMX, 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. NOEMX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLLSX drawdown since its inception was -32.59%, smaller than the maximum NOEMX drawdown of -66.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLLSX and NOEMX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLLSX	NOEMX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.59%	-66.67%	+34.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.39%	-13.06%	-1.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.95%	-16.34%	-4.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.02%	-37.03%	+7.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.59%	-39.49%	+6.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.29%	-4.92%	-1.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.91%	-18.97%	+11.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.85%	3.51%	+0.34%

Volatility

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a higher volatility of 15.13% compared to Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (NOEMX) at 10.27%. This indicates that GLLSX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NOEMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLLSX	NOEMX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.13%	10.27%	+4.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.42%	17.10%	+6.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.27%	18.96%	+6.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.07%	17.01%	+2.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.22%	17.72%	+0.50%

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLLSX has a 1.23% expense ratio, which is higher than NOEMX's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLLSX vs. NOEMX - Dividend Comparison

GLLSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.34%, less than NOEMX's 2.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	1.34%	1.88%	0.74%	0.77%	29.32%	22.85%	0.00%	3.38%	9.47%	8.40%	1.09%	0.94%
NOEMX Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund	2.04%	2.53%	2.98%	3.86%	2.42%	2.87%	2.36%	3.24%	2.76%	1.74%	1.92%	2.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLLSX and NOEMX in my portfolio?

GLLSX and NOEMX have a correlation of 0.75, 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 NOEMX?

GLLSX has higher volatility (15.13%) compared to NOEMX (10.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLLSX dropped -32.59% vs NOEMX's -66.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLLSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.58), 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.