LCSMX vs. GLLSX

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

LCSMX (Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund) and GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) are both Emerging Markets Diversified funds. Over the past 5 years, LCSMX returned 11.55%/yr vs 17.62%/yr for GLLSX. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LCSMX charges 0.00%/yr vs 1.23%/yr for GLLSX.

Performance

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund (LCSMX) 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, LCSMX achieves a 63.33% return, which is significantly higher than GLLSX's 43.84% return.

LCSMX

• 1D: -2.37%
• 1M: 8.58%
• YTD: 63.33%
• 6M: 70.26%
• 1Y: 122.05%
• 3Y*: 30.97%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: —

GLLSX

• 1D: -1.45%
• 1M: 3.44%
• YTD: 43.84%
• 6M: 47.56%
• 1Y: 81.67%
• 3Y*: 28.74%
• 5Y*: 17.62%
• 10Y*: 14.73%

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

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
LCSMX Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund	63.33%	51.52%	-13.60%	16.26%	-27.25%	4.73%	35.72%	6.81%	1.42%
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	43.84%	34.81%	0.73%	21.35%	-23.04%	36.50%	15.93%	23.64%	-14.07%

Correlation

The correlation between LCSMX and GLLSX is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2018	0.76

The correlation between LCSMX and GLLSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (all time) to 0.92 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

LCSMX vs. GLLSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCSMX

LCSMX Risk / Return Rank: 97
LCSMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
LCSMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
LCSMX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
LCSMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
LCSMX Martin Ratio Rank: 98

GLLSX

GLLSX Risk / Return Rank: 95
GLLSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
GLLSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
GLLSX Omega Ratio Rank: 92
GLLSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
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.

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund (LCSMX) 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.

	LCSMX	GLLSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.89	3.89	+1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.23	4.55	+0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.84	1.70	+0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.08	5.81	+2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	31.36	23.07	+8.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCSMX Sharpe Ratio is 4.89, which is comparable to the GLLSX Sharpe Ratio of 3.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCSMX 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

	LCSMX	GLLSX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.89	3.89	+1.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60	0.98	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.83	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.68	-0.03

Drawdowns

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCSMX drawdown since its inception was -39.72%, which is greater than GLLSX's maximum drawdown of -32.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCSMX and GLLSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCSMX	GLLSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.72%	-32.59%	-7.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.39%	-14.39%	-1.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.31%	-20.95%	-2.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.72%	-30.02%	-9.70%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.59%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.77%	-1.87%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.72%	-7.92%	-5.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.96%	3.61%	+0.35%

Volatility

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Volatility Comparison

Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund (LCSMX) has a higher volatility of 13.49% compared to abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) at 9.96%. This indicates that LCSMX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GLLSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCSMX	GLLSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.49%	9.96%	+3.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.84%	19.14%	+3.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.44%	21.50%	+3.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.27%	18.10%	+1.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.03%	17.80%	+2.23%

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCSMX has a 0.00% expense ratio, which is lower than GLLSX's 1.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCSMX vs. GLLSX - Dividend Comparison

LCSMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than GLLSX's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	1.30%	1.88%	0.74%	0.77%	29.32%	22.85%	0.00%	3.38%	9.47%	8.40%	1.09%	0.94%
LCSMX Martin Currie SMA-Shares Series EM Fund	0.61%	1.00%	1.29%	1.22%	1.11%	3.03%	0.48%	0.88%	1.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCSMX and GLLSX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LCSMX 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, LCSMX or GLLSX?

LCSMX has higher volatility (13.49%) compared to GLLSX (9.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCSMX dropped -39.72% vs GLLSX's -32.59%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LCSMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.89 vs 3.89), 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.