PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ARGT vs. QAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ARGT vs. QAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (ARGT) and iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ARGT achieves a 3.65% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's -0.42% return. Over the past 10 years, ARGT has outperformed QAT with an annualized return of 17.46%, while QAT has yielded a comparatively lower 4.31% annualized return.


ARGT

1D
-3.12%
1M
5.42%
YTD
3.65%
6M
0.81%
1Y
5.86%
3Y*
33.61%
5Y*
26.82%
10Y*
17.46%

QAT

1D
-0.37%
1M
-0.79%
YTD
-0.42%
6M
0.19%
1Y
1.83%
3Y*
3.96%
5Y*
3.38%
10Y*
4.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ARGT vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ARGT
Global X MSCI Argentina ETF
3.65%11.51%63.46%53.64%11.80%3.83%14.58%14.50%-32.62%53.87%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF
-0.42%8.81%5.20%2.72%-7.23%14.42%6.94%-0.44%20.03%-11.66%

Correlation

The correlation between ARGT and QAT is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.19

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.24

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.23

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2014

0.23

ARGT vs. QAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ARGT
QAT

Consumer Cyclical

26.3%
0.7%

Energy

22.2%
3.3%

Financial Services

13.7%
54.3%

Basic Materials

13.3%
12.7%

Industrials

8.3%
13.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
0.7%

Utilities

5.1%
2.6%

Communication Services

2.9%
6.7%

Real Estate

1.3%
3.9%

Healthcare

-

0.8%

Technology

-

0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

ARGT
26.3%
QAT
0.7%

Energy

ARGT
22.2%
QAT
3.3%

Financial Services

ARGT
13.7%
QAT
54.3%

Basic Materials

ARGT
13.3%
QAT
12.7%

Industrials

ARGT
8.3%
QAT
13.2%

Consumer Defensive

ARGT
6.9%
QAT
0.7%

Utilities

ARGT
5.1%
QAT
2.6%

Communication Services

ARGT
2.9%
QAT
6.7%

Real Estate

ARGT
1.3%
QAT
3.9%

Healthcare

ARGT

-

QAT
0.8%

Technology

ARGT

-

QAT
0.5%

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

ARGT vs. QAT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ARGT
ARGT Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
ARGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ARGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
ARGT Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
ARGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
ARGT Martin Ratio Rank: 1111
Martin Ratio Rank

QAT
QAT Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ARGT vs. QAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (ARGT) and iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT). 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.


ARGTQATDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.04

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.26

0.17

+0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.57

0.33

+0.24

ARGT vs. QAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ARGT Sharpe Ratio is 0.16, which is comparable to the QAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ARGT and QAT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ARGTQATDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.16

0.14

+0.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

0.23

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.56

0.25

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.07

+0.23

Drawdowns

ARGT vs. QAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ARGT drawdown since its inception was -61.68%, which is greater than QAT's maximum drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ARGT and QAT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ARGTQATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-61.68%

-45.21%

-16.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.97%

-10.60%

-12.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-28.46%

-17.41%

-11.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.14%

-33.17%

-1.97%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.68%

-34.04%

-27.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.96%

-12.80%

+4.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-22.05%

-19.18%

-2.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.20%

5.54%

+5.66%

Volatility

ARGT vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison

Global X MSCI Argentina ETF (ARGT) has a higher volatility of 10.43% compared to iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) at 5.03%. This indicates that ARGT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ARGTQATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.43%

5.03%

+5.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.31%

10.46%

+9.85%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.70%

13.36%

+23.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

31.92%

15.00%

+16.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.44%

17.56%

+13.88%

ARGT vs. QAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ARGT has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than QAT's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

ARGT vs. QAT - Dividend Comparison

ARGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.81%, less than QAT's 3.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ARGT
Global X MSCI Argentina ETF
0.81%0.84%1.41%1.59%2.45%0.93%0.28%1.21%1.34%0.49%0.36%0.89%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF
3.52%3.51%5.90%3.92%4.78%2.33%2.63%3.57%4.63%4.10%3.51%4.49%

Frequently Asked Questions


ARGT and QAT have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ARGT has higher volatility (10.43%) compared to QAT (5.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ARGT dropped -61.68% vs QAT's -45.21%.

On 10-year performance, ARGT leads with 17.46% vs 4.31% for QAT. On fees, QAT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 5.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ARGT has performed better with a 17.46% return vs 4.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QAT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ARGT.

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 3.52%, compared with 0.81% for ARGT.

ARGT is categorized as Latin America Equities, while QAT is Emerging Markets Equities. ARGT tracks MSCI All Argentina 25/50, while QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for ARGT and 0.59% for QAT.

ARGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.16 vs 0.14), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ARGT and QAT

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