GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

GSLC.L (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.)) and EMAD.L (State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - GSLC.L is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 TR USD, while EMAD.L is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Asia Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GSLC.L returned 11.81%/yr vs 6.55%/yr for EMAD.L. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GSLC.L charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for EMAD.L.

Performance

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GSLC.L achieves a 9.36% return, which is significantly lower than EMAD.L's 21.59% return.

GSLC.L

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: -0.65%
• 6M: 9.16%
• YTD: 9.36%
• 1Y: 18.35%
• 3Y*: 18.80%
• 5Y*: 11.81%
• 10Y*: —

EMAD.L

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -8.90%
• 6M: 14.74%
• YTD: 21.59%
• 1Y: 36.41%
• 3Y*: 20.83%
• 5Y*: 6.55%
• 10Y*: 9.69%

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

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GSLC.L Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.)	9.36%	16.46%	23.06%	25.17%	-19.07%	27.52%	18.12%	7.72%
EMAD.L State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	21.59%	32.13%	11.12%	6.54%	-21.75%	-6.15%	28.24%	9.85%

Correlation

The correlation between GSLC.L and EMAD.L is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2019	0.63

The correlation between GSLC.L and EMAD.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

GSLC.L

GSLC.L Risk / Return Rank: 47
GSLC.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
GSLC.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
GSLC.L Omega Ratio Rank: 44
GSLC.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
GSLC.L Martin Ratio Rank: 52

EMAD.L

EMAD.L Risk / Return Rank: 57
EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
EMAD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
EMAD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 55
EMAD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
EMAD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) and State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L). 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.

	GSLC.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.33	1.53	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	2.09	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.28	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	2.69	-0.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.31	8.03	-0.72

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSLC.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.33, which is comparable to the EMAD.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSLC.L and EMAD.L, 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

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSLC.L drawdown since its inception was -33.84%, smaller than the maximum EMAD.L drawdown of -46.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSLC.L and EMAD.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSLC.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.84%	-46.17%	+12.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.07%	-13.38%	+3.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.98%	-20.03%	+1.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.50%	-39.17%	+14.67%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.17%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	-11.48%	+10.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.57%	-14.72%	+9.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.51%	4.50%	-1.99%

Volatility

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity UCITS ETF CLASS USD (Acc.) (GSLC.L) is 3.70%, while State Street SPDR MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (EMAD.L) has a volatility of 9.84%. This indicates that GSLC.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMAD.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GSLC.L	EMAD.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.70%	9.84%	-6.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.76%	21.14%	-10.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.75%	23.53%	-9.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.22%	20.80%	-4.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.88%	20.15%	-2.27%

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSLC.L has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than EMAD.L's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSLC.L vs. EMAD.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither GSLC.L nor EMAD.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSLC.L and EMAD.L in my portfolio?

GSLC.L and EMAD.L have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, GSLC.L or EMAD.L?

On fees, GSLC.L is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, GSLC.L or EMAD.L?

GSLC.L is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for EMAD.L.

What is the main difference between GSLC.L and EMAD.L?

GSLC.L is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while EMAD.L is Asia Pacific Equities. GSLC.L tracks Russell 1000 TR USD, while EMAD.L tracks MSCI EM (Emerging Markets) Asia Index. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for GSLC.L and 0.55% for EMAD.L.