GMSMX vs. NINLX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GMSMX (GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund) and NINLX (Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, GMSMX returned 11.46%/yr vs 12.54%/yr for NINLX. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GMSMX charges 1.17%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for NINLX.

Performance

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund (GMSMX) and Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund (NINLX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GMSMX achieves a 14.92% return, which is significantly lower than NINLX's 22.84% return. Over the past 10 years, GMSMX has underperformed NINLX with an annualized return of 11.46%, while NINLX has yielded a comparatively higher 12.54% annualized return.

GMSMX

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: 1.78%
• YTD: 14.92%
• 6M: 14.82%
• 1Y: 28.75%
• 3Y*: 16.69%
• 5Y*: 6.75%
• 10Y*: 11.46%

NINLX

• 1D: -1.70%
• 1M: 5.51%
• YTD: 22.84%
• 6M: 22.53%
• 1Y: 56.28%
• 3Y*: 19.08%
• 5Y*: 7.54%
• 10Y*: 12.54%

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

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GMSMX GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund	14.92%	8.76%	11.29%	17.73%	-18.23%	24.45%	21.98%	23.25%	-9.38%	14.46%
NINLX Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund	22.84%	18.20%	7.62%	13.89%	-20.22%	26.42%	27.14%	24.92%	-10.56%	16.81%

Correlation

The correlation between GMSMX and NINLX is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2002	0.93

The correlation between GMSMX and NINLX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GMSMX vs. NINLX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMSMX

GMSMX Risk / Return Rank: 44
GMSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
GMSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
GMSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 32
GMSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
GMSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 50

NINLX

NINLX Risk / Return Rank: 83
NINLX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
NINLX Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
NINLX Omega Ratio Rank: 65
NINLX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
NINLX Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund (GMSMX) and Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund (NINLX). 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.

	GMSMX	NINLX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.68	2.76	-1.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	3.58	-1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.44	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.09	6.00	-2.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.10	21.62	-11.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMSMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is lower than the NINLX Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMSMX and NINLX, 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

	GMSMX	NINLX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.68	2.76	-1.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.35	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.53	0.54	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.48	-0.18

Drawdowns

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMSMX drawdown since its inception was -70.55%, which is greater than NINLX's maximum drawdown of -59.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMSMX and NINLX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMSMX	NINLX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.55%	-59.95%	-10.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.22%	-9.39%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.90%	-26.46%	+1.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.90%	-28.71%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.31%	-44.43%	+3.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.52%	-1.70%	+1.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.83%	-9.90%	-4.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.82%	2.59%	+0.23%

Volatility

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund (GMSMX) is 4.84%, while Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund (NINLX) has a volatility of 5.96%. This indicates that GMSMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NINLX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GMSMX	NINLX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.84%	5.96%	-1.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.28%	14.68%	-2.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.08%	20.45%	-3.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.84%	21.80%	-0.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.74%	23.10%	-1.36%

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMSMX has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than NINLX's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMSMX vs. NINLX - Dividend Comparison

GMSMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.02%, more than NINLX's 3.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GMSMX GuideMark Small/Mid Cap Core Fund	6.02%	6.91%	9.08%	0.67%	2.29%	11.71%	2.06%	1.43%	6.72%	34.90%	0.28%	2.83%
NINLX Neuberger Berman Intrinsic Value Fund	3.46%	4.25%	0.92%	0.25%	3.76%	6.40%	1.62%	2.85%	14.51%	5.19%	1.42%	5.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMSMX and NINLX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, GMSMX and NINLX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GMSMX or NINLX?

NINLX has higher volatility (5.96%) compared to GMSMX (4.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMSMX dropped -70.55% vs NINLX's -59.95%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NINLX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.76 vs 1.68), 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.