PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GMF vs. EWT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GMF vs. EWT - 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 Taiwan ETF (EWT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMF achieves a 13.96% return, which is significantly lower than EWT's 66.46% return. Over the past 10 years, GMF has underperformed EWT with an annualized return of 10.11%, while EWT has yielded a comparatively higher 19.72% annualized return.


GMF

1D
0.29%
1M
4.32%
YTD
13.96%
6M
14.78%
1Y
31.46%
3Y*
19.48%
5Y*
5.49%
10Y*
10.11%

EWT

1D
-1.08%
1M
13.99%
YTD
66.46%
6M
71.46%
1Y
104.98%
3Y*
37.99%
5Y*
18.07%
10Y*
19.72%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GMF vs. EWT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GMF
SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
13.96%21.99%16.55%8.20%-18.99%-1.93%24.96%19.92%-14.25%41.71%
EWT
iShares MSCI Taiwan ETF
66.46%28.38%16.11%23.97%-28.90%26.18%31.50%33.36%-9.90%26.81%

Correlation

The correlation between GMF and EWT is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.84

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2007

0.82

The correlation between GMF and EWT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

GMF vs. EWT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GMF
EWT

Technology

37.7%
72.9%

Financial Services

11.9%
13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%
1.9%

Communication Services

5.0%
1.9%

Industrials

4.6%
4.9%

Basic Materials

3.7%
3.5%

Healthcare

2.1%
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
1.1%

Energy

1.5%

-

Utilities

0.9%

-

Real Estate

0.6%

-

Technology

GMF
37.7%
EWT
72.9%

Financial Services

GMF
11.9%
EWT
13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

GMF
8.9%
EWT
1.9%

Communication Services

GMF
5.0%
EWT
1.9%

Industrials

GMF
4.6%
EWT
4.9%

Basic Materials

GMF
3.7%
EWT
3.5%

Healthcare

GMF
2.1%
EWT
0.8%

Consumer Defensive

GMF
1.7%
EWT
1.1%

Energy

GMF
1.5%
EWT

-

Utilities

GMF
0.9%
EWT

-

Real Estate

GMF
0.6%
EWT

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

GMF vs. EWT — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMF
GMF Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
GMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMF Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
GMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMF Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

EWT
EWT Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
EWT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EWT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
EWT Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
EWT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
EWT Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
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. EWT - 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 Taiwan ETF (EWT). 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.


GMFEWTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.66

-0.32

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.50

10.04

-7.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.27

30.81

-21.53

GMF vs. EWT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMF Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is lower than the EWT Sharpe Ratio of 4.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMF and EWT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GMFEWTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

4.20

-2.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.80

-0.51

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

0.92

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.26

+0.04

Drawdowns

GMF vs. EWT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMF drawdown since its inception was -67.18%, roughly equal to the maximum EWT drawdown of -64.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMF and EWT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GMFEWTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.18%

-64.37%

-2.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.62%

-10.51%

-2.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.43%

-25.66%

+4.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.76%

-38.88%

+3.12%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.18%

-38.88%

-1.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.01%

-1.27%

+0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.59%

-19.23%

+2.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.40%

3.42%

-0.02%

Volatility

GMF vs. EWT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is 6.11%, while iShares MSCI Taiwan ETF (EWT) has a volatility of 10.42%. This indicates that GMF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EWT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GMFEWTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.11%

10.42%

-4.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.65%

20.58%

-6.93%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.50%

25.14%

-8.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.52%

22.59%

-4.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.19%

21.60%

-2.41%

GMF vs. EWT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than EWT's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

GMF vs. EWT - Dividend Comparison

GMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, less than EWT's 2.66% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EWT
iShares MSCI Taiwan ETF
2.66%4.43%3.32%8.12%18.82%0.55%1.83%2.49%3.16%2.81%2.39%3.12%
GMF
SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
1.31%1.49%1.92%2.75%2.54%2.71%1.32%1.75%2.26%1.70%2.49%3.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


GMF and EWT 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.

EWT has higher volatility (10.42%) compared to GMF (6.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMF dropped -67.18% vs EWT's -64.37%.

On 10-year performance, EWT leads with 19.72% vs 10.11% for GMF. On fees, GMF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GMF has been the lower-risk option at 6.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, EWT has performed better with a 19.72% return vs 10.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GMF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EWT.

EWT has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 1.31% for GMF.

GMF tracks S&P Asia Pacific Emerging BMI Index, while EWT tracks MSCI Taiwan Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for GMF and 0.59% for EWT.

EWT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.20 vs 1.92), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GMF and EWT

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer