XCEM vs. GSEE
XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and GSEE (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index while GSEE tracks the Solactive GBS Emerging Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XCEM returned 9.92%/yr vs 7.08%/yr for GSEE. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for GSEE.
Performance
XCEM vs. GSEE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 24.71% return, which is significantly higher than GSEE's 17.86% return.
XCEM
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- -5.51%
- 6M
- 13.55%
- YTD
- 24.71%
- 1Y
- 46.19%
- 3Y*
- 21.41%
- 5Y*
- 9.92%
- 10Y*
- 10.65%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.40%
GSEE
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- -2.03%
- 6M
- 8.46%
- YTD
- 17.86%
- 1Y
- 34.63%
- 3Y*
- 18.94%
- 5Y*
- 7.08%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 12.32%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $246.11K | $164.63K | $181.97K | |
| $7.04M | $7.53M | $9.61M |
XCEM vs. GSEE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 24.71% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 7.87% | 50.21% |
GSEE Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 17.86% | 33.38% | 4.94% | 11.03% | -19.57% | -2.61% | 43.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCEM and GSEE is 0.93, 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. | 0.93 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.89 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2020 | 0.87 |
The correlation between XCEM and GSEE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.
XCEM vs. GSEE - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XCEM
GSEE
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Energy
Healthcare
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Technology
XCEM
GSEE
Financial Services
XCEM
GSEE
Industrials
XCEM
GSEE
Basic Materials
XCEM
GSEE
Consumer Cyclical
XCEM
GSEE
Communication Services
XCEM
GSEE
Energy
XCEM
GSEE
Healthcare
XCEM
GSEE
Utilities
XCEM
GSEE
Consumer Defensive
XCEM
GSEE
Real Estate
XCEM
GSEE
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
XCEM vs. GSEE — Risk / Return Rank
XCEM
GSEE
XCEM vs. GSEE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GSEE). 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.
| XCEM | GSEE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.28 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.55 | 2.47 | +0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.98 | 7.58 | +1.40 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XCEM vs. GSEE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, which is greater than GSEE's maximum drawdown of -37.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and GSEE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCEM | GSEE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.24% | -37.51% | -3.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.20% | -14.07% | -4.13% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.92% | -17.39% | -1.53% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.57% | -32.16% | +2.59% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.24% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.95% | -9.53% | -3.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.58% | -14.52% | +5.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.16% | 4.58% | +0.58% |
Volatility
XCEM vs. GSEE - Volatility Comparison
Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 10.15% compared to Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GSEE) at 8.62%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GSEE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCEM | GSEE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.15% | 8.62% | +1.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.63% | 21.51% | +3.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.40% | 23.79% | +2.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.09% | 19.12% | -0.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.11% | 19.03% | +1.08% |
XCEM vs. GSEE - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than GSEE's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCEM vs. GSEE - Dividend Comparison
XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, more than GSEE's 2.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GSEE Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF | 2.15% | 2.53% | 2.79% | 3.07% | 3.05% | 6.10% | 2.41% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 2.61% | 3.25% | 2.76% | 1.22% | 2.42% | 1.94% | 1.63% | 2.11% | 2.70% | 9.56% | 1.24% | 2.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, XCEM and GSEE 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.
XCEM has higher volatility (10.15%) compared to GSEE (8.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs GSEE's -37.51%.
On 5-year performance, XCEM leads with 9.92% vs 7.08% for GSEE. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, GSEE has been the lower-risk option at 8.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 9.92% return vs 7.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for GSEE.
XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 2.15% for GSEE.
XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while GSEE tracks Solactive GBS Emerging Markets Large & Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Columbia and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.36% for GSEE.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.47), 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 XCEM and GSEE
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