PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GNR vs. IEMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GNR vs. IEMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GNR achieves a 14.65% return, which is significantly lower than IEMG's 18.92% return. Over the past 10 years, GNR has outperformed IEMG with an annualized return of 9.85%, while IEMG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.06% annualized return.


GNR

1D
1.76%
1M
1.29%
6M
6.86%
YTD
14.65%
1Y
30.46%
3Y*
11.51%
5Y*
10.49%
10Y*
9.85%
ALL TIME*
5.29%

IEMG

1D
2.71%
1M
-7.39%
6M
13.60%
YTD
18.92%
1Y
32.41%
3Y*
19.86%
5Y*
7.09%
10Y*
9.06%
ALL TIME*
6.29%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GNR vs. IEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GNR
SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
14.65%28.68%-8.27%2.95%10.20%24.73%-0.03%16.49%-13.19%22.64%
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
18.92%32.56%6.50%11.52%-19.98%-0.64%17.87%17.81%-14.92%37.38%

Correlation

The correlation between GNR and IEMG is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.61

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

0.64

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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2012

0.71

The correlation between GNR and IEMG shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.71 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GNR vs. IEMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GNR
IEMG

Basic Materials

53.5%
5.8%

Energy

31.3%
3.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.5%
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

5.4%
2.8%

Real Estate

1.0%
1.5%

Industrials

0.3%
7.7%

Financial Services

0.0%
17.3%

Healthcare

0.0%
3.2%

Utilities

0.0%
1.9%

Communication Services

-

5.6%

Technology

-

43.6%

Basic Materials

GNR
53.5%
IEMG
5.8%

Energy

GNR
31.3%
IEMG
3.0%

Consumer Cyclical

GNR
8.5%
IEMG
7.7%

Consumer Defensive

GNR
5.4%
IEMG
2.8%

Real Estate

GNR
1.0%
IEMG
1.5%

Industrials

GNR
0.3%
IEMG
7.7%

Financial Services

GNR
0.0%
IEMG
17.3%

Healthcare

GNR
0.0%
IEMG
3.2%

Utilities

GNR
0.0%
IEMG
1.9%

Communication Services

GNR

-

IEMG
5.6%

Technology

GNR

-

IEMG
43.6%

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

GNR vs. IEMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNR
GNR Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

IEMG
IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

GNR vs. IEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) and iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG). 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.


GNRIEMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.27

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.78

2.46

+0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.88

7.96

+0.93

GNR vs. IEMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNR Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the IEMG Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNR and IEMG, 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...

Drawdowns

GNR vs. IEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, which is greater than IEMG's maximum drawdown of -38.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and IEMG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GNRIEMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-51.37%

-38.71%

-12.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.99%

-13.21%

+2.22%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.15%

-17.21%

-3.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.66%

-33.61%

+7.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.59%

-38.71%

-9.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.11%

-7.79%

+1.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.89%

-12.90%

-1.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.44%

4.08%

-0.64%

Volatility

GNR vs. IEMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) is 4.48%, while iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a volatility of 9.46%. This indicates that GNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GNRIEMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.48%

9.46%

-4.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.02%

21.25%

-7.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.19%

23.16%

-5.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.19%

19.21%

+0.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.77%

20.26%

+1.51%

GNR vs. IEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IEMG's 0.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

GNR vs. IEMG - Dividend Comparison

GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, more than IEMG's 2.27% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GNR
SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF
2.59%2.76%4.73%3.37%4.37%3.44%2.78%3.84%3.51%2.40%2.06%4.59%
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
2.27%2.75%3.20%2.89%2.71%3.06%1.87%3.15%2.76%2.35%2.28%2.53%

Frequently Asked Questions


GNR and IEMG have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IEMG has higher volatility (9.46%) compared to GNR (4.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs IEMG's -38.71%.

On 10-year performance, GNR leads with 9.85% vs 9.06% for IEMG. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GNR has performed better with a 9.85% return vs 9.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.

GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.59%, compared with 2.27% for IEMG.

GNR is categorized as Natural Resources, while IEMG is Emerging Markets Diversified. GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while IEMG tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net). They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.09% for IEMG.

GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.41), 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 GNR and IEMG

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