GMF vs. EEMA

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA).

GMF and EEMA are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GMF is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index. It was launched on Mar 19, 2007. EEMA is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Emerging Markets Asia Index. It was launched on Feb 8, 2012. Both GMF and EEMA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

GMF vs. EEMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GMF vs. EEMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	-1.51%	21.99%	16.55%	8.20%	-18.99%	-1.93%	24.96%	19.92%	-14.25%	41.71%
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF	2.55%	33.27%	10.23%	6.57%	-21.49%	-4.22%	25.17%	18.60%	-15.76%	43.41%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a -1.51% return, which is significantly lower than EEMA's 2.55% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GMF having a 8.58% annualized return and EEMA not far behind at 8.40%.

GMF

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: -6.80%
• YTD: -1.51%
• 6M: -1.80%
• 1Y: 19.86%
• 3Y*: 13.18%
• 5Y*: 2.83%
• 10Y*: 8.58%

EEMA

• 1D: 0.72%
• 1M: -7.88%
• YTD: 2.55%
• 6M: 5.40%
• 1Y: 32.15%
• 3Y*: 15.23%
• 5Y*: 2.99%
• 10Y*: 8.40%

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

GMF vs. EEMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than EEMA's 0.50% expense ratio.

EEMA

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF

GMF

SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF

Return for Risk

GMF vs. EEMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMF

GMF Risk / Return Rank: 57
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 56
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 55

EEMA

EEMA Risk / Return Rank: 78
EEMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
EEMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EEMA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
EEMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EEMA Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

GMF vs. EEMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA). 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.

	GMF	EEMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.52	-0.44
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	2.12	-0.54
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.30	-0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.54	2.25	-0.71
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.75	8.46	-2.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GMF vs. EEMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is comparable to the EEMA Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMF and EEMA, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GMF	EEMA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.08	1.52	-0.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	0.15	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	0.41	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.27	0.30	-0.03

Correlation

The correlation between GMF and EEMA is 0.92, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

GMF vs. EEMA - Dividend Comparison

GMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, more than EEMA's 1.44% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GMF SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF	1.51%	1.49%	1.92%	2.75%	2.54%	2.71%	1.32%	1.75%	2.26%	1.70%	2.49%	3.76%
EEMA iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF	1.44%	1.48%	1.74%	2.02%	1.78%	2.19%	1.15%	1.86%	2.17%	1.74%	1.74%	2.44%

Drawdowns

GMF vs. EEMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMF drawdown since its inception was -67.18%, which is greater than EEMA's maximum drawdown of -44.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMF and EEMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMF	EEMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.18%	-44.18%	-23.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.03%	-14.30%	+1.27%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-36.10%	-40.87%	+4.77%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.18%	-44.18%	+4.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.81%	-10.61%	+0.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.72%	-14.11%	-2.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	3.81%	-0.33%

Volatility

GMF vs. EEMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is 6.79%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) has a volatility of 9.12%. This indicates that GMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EEMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMF	EEMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.79%	9.12%	-2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.55%	15.25%	-2.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.54%	21.31%	-2.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.36%	19.94%	-1.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.12%	20.65%	-1.53%