GEM vs VTI
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, GEM or VTI?
Each has led over a different period.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. GEM led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GEM | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.8B | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.87% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 1,478 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +21.02%Best | +13.35% |
| 1Y Return | +27.90%Best | +15.92% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.47%Best | +23.41% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.03% | +12.83%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.4% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -37.0% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,407 | $18,286Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.3% | 33.3%Best |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 25, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 29, 2015 to Oct 2, 2026 (11 years).
GEM vs VTI growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 11 years both funds cover.
GEM vs VTI Performance
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta Emerging Markets Equity ETF (GEM) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GEM returned +27.90% while VTI returned +15.92%. Year to date, GEM is up 21.02% versus a gain of 13.35% for VTI.
Over three years, GEM compounded at +23.47% per year against +23.41% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +9.03% and +12.83% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.97% annualized vs +9.22%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.4% compared with 15.5% for VTI. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -37.0% for GEM and -35.0% for VTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GEM charges 0.35% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GEM currently yields 1.87% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 732 holdings in GEM and 3,463 in VTI, totalling 95.9% and 98.1% of the two funds. That is not enough of VTI to divide by, so no overlap percentage is shown here. Within what we can see, 1 positions appear in both.
The two holdings books were reported 46 days apart, GEM as of Sep 15, 2026 and VTI as of Jul 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 732 positions we hold weights for in GEM and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 1,478 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,149 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for GEM (97.4% of the fund), and 15 for GEM that do not appear in VTI (5.2%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GEM | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ACIAlbertsons Cos. Llc / Safeway Inc. / New Albertsons Inc. | 0.03% | 0.01% | 0.02% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of GEM and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GEM or VTI?
GEM has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GEM or VTI?
Over the past year GEM returned +27.90% vs +15.92% for VTI, so GEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GEM annualized +9.22% vs +13.97% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GEM or VTI?
GEM has been the more volatile fund at 16.4% annualized versus 15.5% for VTI. Worst drawdown: GEM -37.0% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both GEM and VTI?
GEM and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, GEM or VTI?
GEM yields 1.87% while VTI yields 1.03%, so GEM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than GEM?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. GEM led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.