LNGZX vs. GSAGX
LNGZX (Columbia Greater China Fund) and GSAGX (Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund) are both China Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LNGZX returned 2.95%/yr vs 4.45%/yr for GSAGX. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. LNGZX charges 1.25%/yr vs 1.47%/yr for GSAGX.
Performance
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LNGZX achieves a -10.99% return, which is significantly lower than GSAGX's -1.06% return. Over the past 10 years, LNGZX has underperformed GSAGX with an annualized return of 2.95%, while GSAGX has yielded a comparatively higher 4.45% annualized return.
LNGZX
- 1D
- 1.31%
- 1M
- 3.76%
- 6M
- -14.42%
- YTD
- -10.99%
- 1Y
- -2.31%
- 3Y*
- 1.74%
- 5Y*
- -8.49%
- 10Y*
- 2.95%
- ALL TIME*
- 7.28%
GSAGX
- 1D
- 1.36%
- 1M
- -0.86%
- 6M
- -6.43%
- YTD
- -1.06%
- 1Y
- 13.37%
- 3Y*
- 7.32%
- 5Y*
- -5.18%
- 10Y*
- 4.45%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.17%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LNGZX Columbia Greater China Fund | -10.99% | 27.49% | 12.29% | -18.70% | -28.42% | -25.21% | 46.04% | 32.95% | -20.01% | 59.90% |
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund | -1.06% | 32.36% | 13.00% | -18.78% | -30.71% | -14.26% | 48.21% | 26.22% | -18.45% | 51.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between LNGZX and GSAGX is 0.91, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 1998 | 0.87 |
The correlation between LNGZX and GSAGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LNGZX vs. GSAGX — Risk / Return Rank
LNGZX
GSAGX
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) and Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX). 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.
| LNGZX | GSAGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.98 | 1.10 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.21 | 0.80 | -1.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.41 | 1.82 | -2.23 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LNGZX drawdown since its inception was -73.37%, roughly equal to the maximum GSAGX drawdown of -70.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LNGZX and GSAGX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LNGZX | GSAGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -73.37% | -70.73% | -2.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.54% | -12.65% | -10.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.98% | -23.39% | -0.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.81% | -54.82% | -1.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -67.94% | -63.98% | -3.96% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -53.57% | -40.58% | -12.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.67% | -28.65% | +1.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.71% | 5.56% | +6.15% |
Volatility
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Columbia Greater China Fund (LNGZX) is 6.62%, while Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund (GSAGX) has a volatility of 7.40%. This indicates that LNGZX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSAGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LNGZX | GSAGX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.62% | 7.40% | -0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.18% | 15.40% | +0.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.84% | 20.00% | +1.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.57% | 25.29% | +4.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.61% | 22.80% | +3.81% |
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Expense Ratio Comparison
LNGZX has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GSAGX's 1.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
LNGZX vs. GSAGX - Dividend Comparison
LNGZX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, more than GSAGX's 1.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSAGX Goldman Sachs China Equity Fund | 1.36% | 1.34% | 1.40% | 0.89% | 0.00% | 6.78% | 5.02% | 0.57% | 6.92% | 1.35% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LNGZX Columbia Greater China Fund | 2.11% | 1.88% | 1.21% | 0.67% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 4.29% | 1.40% | 5.85% | 1.20% | 0.00% | 4.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, LNGZX and GSAGX 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.
GSAGX has higher volatility (7.40%) compared to LNGZX (6.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LNGZX dropped -73.37% vs GSAGX's -70.73%.
GSAGX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.51 vs -0.22), 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 LNGZX and GSAGX
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