GVUS vs. GEM
GVUS (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF) and GEM (Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GVUS is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Russell 1000 Value 40 Act Daily Capped Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GVUS returned 33.93% vs 36.47% for GEM. Their 0.51 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GVUS charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for GEM.
Performance
GVUS vs. GEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GVUS achieves a 22.72% return, which is significantly higher than GEM's 20.74% return.
GVUS
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 3.72%
- 6M
- 16.08%
- YTD
- 22.72%
- 1Y
- 33.93%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 22.21%
GEM
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- -2.50%
- 6M
- 11.99%
- YTD
- 20.74%
- 1Y
- 36.47%
- 3Y*
- 20.45%
- 5Y*
- 8.06%
- 10Y*
- 8.53%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.38%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $6.26M | $6.34M | $5.46M | |
| $2.21M | $1.78M | $685.48K |
GVUS vs. GEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF | 22.72% | 15.90% | 14.08% | 5.51% |
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 20.74% | 33.43% | 6.66% | 3.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between GVUS and GEM is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.54 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2023 | 0.51 |
The correlation between GVUS and GEM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.
GVUS vs. GEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
GVUS
GEM
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Technology
GVUS
GEM
Financial Services
GVUS
GEM
Healthcare
GVUS
GEM
Industrials
GVUS
GEM
Consumer Cyclical
GVUS
GEM
Consumer Defensive
GVUS
GEM
Energy
GVUS
GEM
Utilities
GVUS
GEM
Real Estate
GVUS
GEM
Basic Materials
GVUS
GEM
Communication Services
GVUS
GEM
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
GVUS vs. GEM — Risk / Return Rank
GVUS
GEM
GVUS vs. GEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) and Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM). 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.
| GVUS | GEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.55 | 1.29 | +0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.10 | 2.72 | +2.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 21.80 | 7.97 | +13.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GVUS vs. GEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GVUS drawdown since its inception was -15.82%, smaller than the maximum GEM drawdown of -37.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GVUS and GEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GVUS | GEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.82% | -37.02% | +21.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.68% | -13.50% | +6.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.10% | -7.10% | +7.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.91% | -11.92% | +10.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.56% | 4.59% | -3.03% |
Volatility
GVUS vs. GEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) is 3.00%, while Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) has a volatility of 8.16%. This indicates that GVUS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GVUS | GEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.00% | 8.16% | -5.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.69% | 21.71% | -13.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.25% | 23.81% | -12.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.20% | 18.67% | -5.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.20% | 19.36% | -6.16% |
GVUS vs. GEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
GVUS has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than GEM's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
GVUS vs. GEM - Dividend Comparison
GVUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than GEM's 1.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GEM Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 1.91% | 2.30% | 2.58% | 2.97% | 2.96% | 3.00% | 1.63% | 3.13% | 2.08% | 1.81% | 1.98% | 0.25% |
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF | 1.46% | 1.77% | 2.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GVUS and GEM have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GEM has higher volatility (8.16%) compared to GVUS (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GVUS dropped -15.82% vs GEM's -37.02%.
On 1-year performance, GEM leads with 36.47% vs 33.93% for GVUS. On fees, GVUS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, GVUS has been the lower-risk option at 3.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GEM has performed better with a 36.47% return vs 33.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GVUS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for GEM.
GEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.91%, compared with 1.46% for GVUS.
GVUS is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while GEM is Emerging Markets Equities. GVUS tracks Russell 1000 Value 40 Act Daily Capped Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while GEM tracks Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity Index. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for GVUS and 0.45% for GEM.
GVUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 1.54), 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.
Find the right allocation for GVUS and GEM
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