NOEMX vs. GLLSX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

NOEMX (Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund) and GLLSX (abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, NOEMX returned 8.25%/yr vs 13.09%/yr for GLLSX. Their 0.80 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NOEMX charges 0.22%/yr vs 1.23%/yr for GLLSX.

Performance

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (NOEMX) 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, NOEMX achieves a 15.64% return, which is significantly lower than GLLSX's 28.23% return. Over the past 10 years, NOEMX has underperformed GLLSX with an annualized return of 8.25%, while GLLSX has yielded a comparatively higher 13.09% annualized return.

NOEMX

• 1D: 3.20%
• 1M: -4.17%
• 6M: 6.20%
• YTD: 15.64%
• 1Y: 31.66%
• 3Y*: 17.49%
• 5Y*: 6.80%
• 10Y*: 8.25%
• ALL TIME*: 5.07%

GLLSX

• 1D: 5.26%
• 1M: -5.93%
• 6M: 15.32%
• YTD: 28.23%
• 1Y: 55.14%
• 3Y*: 21.64%
• 5Y*: 14.02%
• 10Y*: 13.09%
• ALL TIME*: 10.22%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
NOEMX Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
NOEMX Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund	15.64%	33.67%	7.10%	9.20%	-20.53%	-3.36%	17.63%	18.32%	-15.04%	37.34%
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	28.23%	34.81%	0.73%	21.35%	-23.04%	36.50%	15.93%	23.64%	-11.50%	23.06%

Correlation

The correlation between NOEMX and GLLSX is 0.79, 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.	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.79
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 3, 2012	0.80

The correlation between NOEMX and GLLSX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NOEMX vs. GLLSX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NOEMX

NOEMX Risk / Return Rank: 58
NOEMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
NOEMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
NOEMX Omega Ratio Rank: 61
NOEMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
NOEMX Martin Ratio Rank: 52

GLLSX

GLLSX Risk / Return Rank: 80
GLLSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
GLLSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
GLLSX Omega Ratio Rank: 79
GLLSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
GLLSX Martin Ratio Rank: 84

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (NOEMX) 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.

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.

	NOEMX	GLLSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	1.89	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	2.38	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.36	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.21	2.90	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	10.47	-3.38

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOEMX Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the GLLSX Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOEMX 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.

Drawdowns

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOEMX drawdown since its inception was -66.67%, which is greater than GLLSX's maximum drawdown of -32.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOEMX and GLLSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOEMX	GLLSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.67%	-32.59%	-34.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.01%	-18.34%	+4.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.34%	-20.95%	+4.61%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.60%	-30.02%	-4.58%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.49%	-32.59%	-6.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.26%	-14.05%	+2.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.91%	-7.92%	-10.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.34%	5.08%	-0.74%

Volatility

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (NOEMX) is 9.39%, while abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund (GLLSX) has a volatility of 12.43%. This indicates that NOEMX 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

	NOEMX	GLLSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.39%	12.43%	-3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.26%	26.48%	-7.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.94%	28.15%	-7.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.35%	19.87%	-2.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.91%	18.62%	-0.71%

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOEMX has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than GLLSX's 1.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOEMX vs. GLLSX - Dividend Comparison

NOEMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.19%, more than GLLSX's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GLLSX abrdn Emerging Markets ex-China Fund	1.46%	1.88%	0.74%	0.77%	29.32%	22.85%	0.00%	3.38%	9.47%	8.40%	1.09%	0.94%
NOEMX Northern Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund	2.19%	2.53%	2.98%	3.86%	2.42%	2.87%	2.36%	3.24%	2.76%	1.74%	1.92%	2.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOEMX and GLLSX in my portfolio?

NOEMX and GLLSX have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NOEMX or GLLSX?

GLLSX has higher volatility (12.43%) compared to NOEMX (9.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOEMX dropped -66.67% vs GLLSX's -32.59%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GLLSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.48), 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.