GSAGX vs. MMCFX

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

GSAGX (Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund) and MMCFX (AMG Veritas China Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, GSAGX returned 5.70%/yr vs 5.61%/yr for MMCFX. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GSAGX charges 1.47%/yr vs 1.14%/yr for MMCFX.

Performance

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX) and AMG Veritas China Fund (MMCFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSAGX achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly lower than MMCFX's 6.21% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with GSAGX having a 5.70% annualized return and MMCFX not far behind at 5.61%.

GSAGX

• 1D: -2.80%
• 1M: -3.38%
• YTD: 1.80%
• 6M: 1.44%
• 1Y: 16.03%
• 3Y*: 11.58%
• 5Y*: -6.52%
• 10Y*: 5.70%

MMCFX

• 1D: -4.59%
• 1M: 1.27%
• YTD: 6.21%
• 6M: 5.78%
• 1Y: 19.46%
• 3Y*: 6.55%
• 5Y*: -7.51%
• 10Y*: 5.61%

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

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund	1.80%	32.36%	13.00%	-18.78%	-30.71%	-14.26%	48.21%	26.22%	-18.45%	51.62%
MMCFX AMG Veritas China Fund	6.21%	27.88%	-0.59%	-18.35%	-26.33%	-0.49%	17.79%	27.49%	-5.22%	24.07%

Correlation

The correlation between GSAGX and MMCFX is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.89
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 1995	0.56

Over the past year, GSAGX and MMCFX have become more correlated (0.93) than their long-term average of 0.56, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

GSAGX vs. MMCFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSAGX

GSAGX Risk / Return Rank: 18
GSAGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
GSAGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
GSAGX Omega Ratio Rank: 17
GSAGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
GSAGX Martin Ratio Rank: 17

MMCFX

MMCFX Risk / Return Rank: 16
MMCFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
MMCFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
MMCFX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
MMCFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
MMCFX Martin Ratio Rank: 11

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.

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX) and AMG Veritas China Fund (MMCFX). 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.

	GSAGX	MMCFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.00	0.98	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.47	1.40	+0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.19	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.54	1.24	+0.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.95	2.67	+1.28

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSAGX Sharpe Ratio is 1.00, which is comparable to the MMCFX Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSAGX and MMCFX, 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

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSAGX drawdown since its inception was -70.73%, roughly equal to the maximum MMCFX drawdown of -70.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSAGX and MMCFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSAGX	MMCFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-70.73%	-70.40%	-0.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.15%	-18.42%	+6.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.08%	-29.01%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.97%	-57.12%	-1.85%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-63.98%	-57.48%	-6.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.87%	-34.67%	-4.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.61%	-26.68%	-1.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.73%	8.54%	-3.81%

Volatility

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX) is 6.94%, while AMG Veritas China Fund (MMCFX) has a volatility of 11.31%. This indicates that GSAGX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MMCFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GSAGX	MMCFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.94%	11.31%	-4.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.00%	18.13%	-4.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.68%	23.38%	-4.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.52%	25.66%	-0.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.70%	24.88%	-2.18%

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSAGX has a 1.47% expense ratio, which is higher than MMCFX's 1.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSAGX vs. MMCFX - Dividend Comparison

GSAGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%, more than MMCFX's 0.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund	1.32%	1.34%	1.40%	0.89%	0.00%	6.78%	5.02%	0.57%	6.92%	1.35%	0.00%	0.00%
MMCFX AMG Veritas China Fund	0.30%	0.32%	1.34%	0.83%	0.00%	114.57%	4.66%	9.14%	25.03%	12.44%	0.35%	12.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSAGX and MMCFX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, GSAGX and MMCFX 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, GSAGX or MMCFX?

MMCFX has higher volatility (11.31%) compared to GSAGX (6.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSAGX dropped -70.73% vs MMCFX's -70.40%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSAGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.00 vs 0.98), 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.