Screener
SAGP vs GMF
Strategas Global Policy Opportunities ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF
Key differences
- GMF costs 0.16% less per year.
- GMF is significantly larger than SAGP — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- SAGP is classified as equity, while GMF is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- SAGP covers global markets; GMF covers emerging markets.
- SAGP follows a active selection strategy; GMF uses index tracking.
- Over the last 3 years, GMF has delivered higher annualized returns.
- GMF has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| SAGP | GMF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.49% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $75M | $386M |
| Since | 2022 | 2007 |
| Dividend yield | 0.52% | 1.39% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | global | emerging markets |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +17.1% | +30.3% |
| CAGR 3Y | +15.3% | +19.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +6.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.88 | 0.91 |
| Volatility 1Y | 12.97% | 16.42% |
| Max drawdown | -22.90% | -40.18% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to SAGP and GMF
Explore further