IEMFX vs. GLLSX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IEMFX (T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund) and GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 10 years, IEMFX returned 8.57%/yr vs 15.05%/yr for GLLSX. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IEMFX charges 1.06%/yr vs 1.23%/yr for GLLSX.

Performance

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) and abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEMFX achieves a 32.35% return, which is significantly lower than GLLSX's 46.58% return. Over the past 10 years, IEMFX has underperformed GLLSX with an annualized return of 8.57%, while GLLSX has yielded a comparatively higher 15.05% annualized return.

IEMFX

• 1D: 1.19%
• 1M: 12.44%
• YTD: 32.35%
• 6M: 36.21%
• 1Y: 65.52%
• 3Y*: 19.75%
• 5Y*: 3.24%
• 10Y*: 8.57%

GLLSX

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 11.34%
• YTD: 46.58%
• 6M: 50.65%
• 1Y: 88.61%
• 3Y*: 29.36%
• 5Y*: 18.30%
• 10Y*: 15.05%

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

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IEMFX T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund	32.35%	32.91%	-1.60%	2.26%	-23.34%	-10.61%	17.81%	26.62%	-16.02%	42.87%
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	46.58%	34.81%	0.73%	21.35%	-23.04%	36.50%	15.93%	23.64%	-11.50%	23.06%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMFX and GLLSX 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	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2012	0.81

The correlation between IEMFX and GLLSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.93 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IEMFX vs. GLLSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEMFX

IEMFX Risk / Return Rank: 91
IEMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
IEMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
IEMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 89
IEMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
IEMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 92

GLLSX

GLLSX Risk / Return Rank: 96
GLLSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
GLLSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
GLLSX Omega Ratio Rank: 94
GLLSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
GLLSX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) and abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX). 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.

	IEMFX	GLLSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.46	4.14	-0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.24	4.78	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.74	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.86	6.17	-1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.78	24.54	-4.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMFX Sharpe Ratio is 3.46, which is comparable to the GLLSX Sharpe Ratio of 4.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMFX and GLLSX, 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

	IEMFX	GLLSX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.46	4.14	-0.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.18	1.02	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	0.85	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.47	0.69	-0.22

Drawdowns

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMFX drawdown since its inception was -71.65%, which is greater than GLLSX's maximum drawdown of -32.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMFX and GLLSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	IEMFX	GLLSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.65%	-32.59%	-39.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.49%	-14.39%	+0.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.34%	-20.95%	+4.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-43.14%	-30.02%	-13.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.27%	-32.59%	-13.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.76%	-7.92%	-11.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.30%	3.61%	-0.31%

Volatility

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund (IEMFX) is 8.15%, while abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a volatility of 9.95%. This indicates that IEMFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLLSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IEMFX	GLLSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.15%	9.95%	-1.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.28%	19.05%	-2.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.92%	21.43%	-2.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.91%	18.09%	-0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.60%	17.80%	+0.80%

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMFX has a 1.06% expense ratio, which is lower than GLLSX's 1.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

IEMFX vs. GLLSX - Dividend Comparison

IEMFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than GLLSX's 1.28% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	1.28%	1.88%	0.74%	0.77%	29.32%	22.85%	0.00%	3.38%	9.47%	8.40%	1.09%	0.94%
IEMFX T. Rowe Price Institutional Emerging Markets Equity Fund	1.84%	2.43%	0.92%	1.88%	3.87%	3.07%	0.56%	1.43%	1.15%	0.54%	0.83%	0.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IEMFX and GLLSX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, IEMFX and GLLSX 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, IEMFX or GLLSX?

GLLSX has higher volatility (9.95%) compared to IEMFX (8.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEMFX dropped -71.65% vs GLLSX's -32.59%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLLSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.14 vs 3.46), 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.