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

Performance

ECON vs. QAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) 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, ECON achieves a 36.71% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's -0.05% return. Over the past 10 years, ECON has outperformed QAT with an annualized return of 6.24%, while QAT has yielded a comparatively lower 4.34% annualized return.


ECON

1D
1.28%
1M
14.62%
YTD
36.71%
6M
39.84%
1Y
67.91%
3Y*
24.38%
5Y*
7.57%
10Y*
6.24%

QAT

1D
-1.37%
1M
0.05%
YTD
-0.05%
6M
1.39%
1Y
3.73%
3Y*
4.09%
5Y*
3.48%
10Y*
4.34%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ECON vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
36.71%34.15%0.22%7.51%-16.00%-14.11%20.83%17.22%-26.87%27.46%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF
-0.05%8.81%5.20%2.72%-7.23%14.42%6.94%-0.44%20.03%-11.66%

Correlation

The correlation between ECON and QAT is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.35

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

0.34

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

0.31

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

0.30

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

0.31

ECON vs. QAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ECON
QAT

Technology

30.4%
0.5%

Financial Services

24.5%
54.3%

Communication Services

10.2%
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
0.7%

Basic Materials

7.1%
12.7%

Industrials

6.5%
13.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
0.7%

Energy

3.5%
3.3%

Healthcare

2.8%
0.8%

Utilities

1.4%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.4%
3.9%

Technology

ECON
30.4%
QAT
0.5%

Financial Services

ECON
24.5%
QAT
54.3%

Communication Services

ECON
10.2%
QAT
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

ECON
8.6%
QAT
0.7%

Basic Materials

ECON
7.1%
QAT
12.7%

Industrials

ECON
6.5%
QAT
13.2%

Consumer Defensive

ECON
3.5%
QAT
0.7%

Energy

ECON
3.5%
QAT
3.3%

Healthcare

ECON
2.8%
QAT
0.8%

Utilities

ECON
1.4%
QAT
2.6%

Real Estate

ECON
1.4%
QAT
3.9%

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

ECON vs. QAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECON
ECON Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
ECON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ECON Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
ECON Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
ECON Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
ECON Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

QAT
QAT Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
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.

ECON vs. QAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) 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.


ECONQATDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.36

0.28

+3.08

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.31

0.48

+3.83

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.06

+0.54

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.01

0.38

+4.63

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.79

0.73

+18.06

ECON vs. QAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECON Sharpe Ratio is 3.36, which is higher than the QAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECON 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


ECONQATDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.36

0.28

+3.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.38

0.23

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.30

0.25

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.24

0.07

+0.17

Drawdowns

ECON vs. QAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECON drawdown since its inception was -45.37%, roughly equal to the maximum QAT drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECON and QAT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ECONQATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-45.37%

-45.21%

-0.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.76%

-10.60%

-3.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.37%

-17.41%

+1.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-38.08%

-33.17%

-4.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.37%

-34.04%

-11.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-12.48%

+12.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.65%

-19.18%

+2.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.67%

5.52%

-1.85%

Volatility

ECON vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison

Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF (ECON) has a higher volatility of 8.95% compared to iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) at 5.05%. This indicates that ECON'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


ECONQATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.95%

5.05%

+3.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.60%

10.50%

+7.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.33%

13.36%

+6.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.29%

15.01%

+5.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.03%

17.56%

+3.47%

ECON vs. QAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECON has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QAT's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

ECON vs. QAT - Dividend Comparison

ECON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than QAT's 3.51% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ECON
Columbia Emerging Markets Consumer ETF
1.30%1.77%0.76%1.57%2.06%1.08%0.63%1.68%0.98%0.35%0.74%1.10%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF
3.51%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


ECON and QAT have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ECON has higher volatility (8.95%) compared to QAT (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECON dropped -45.37% vs QAT's -45.21%.

On 10-year performance, ECON leads with 6.24% vs 4.34% for QAT. On fees, ECON is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 5.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ECON has performed better with a 6.24% return vs 4.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ECON is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 1.30% for ECON.

ECON tracks Dow Jones Emerging Markets Consumer Titans Index, while QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ECON and 0.59% for QAT.

ECON currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs 0.28), 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 ECON 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