PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EEM vs. XQQ.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EEM vs. XQQ.TO

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

EEM (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF) and XQQ.TO (iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)) are both exchange-traded funds - EEM is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net), while XQQ.TO is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Morningstar US Market TR CAD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EEM returned 10.16%/yr vs 19.25%/yr for XQQ.TO. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EEM charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for XQQ.TO.

Performance

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

EEM is traded in USD, while XQQ.TO is traded in CAD. To make them comparable, the XQQ.TO values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEM achieves a 28.15% return, which is significantly higher than XQQ.TO's 17.28% return. Over the past 10 years, EEM has underperformed XQQ.TO with an annualized return of 10.16%, while XQQ.TO has yielded a comparatively higher 19.25% annualized return.

EEM

1D
3.29%
1M
7.75%
YTD
28.15%
6M
31.50%
1Y
52.42%
3Y*
22.37%
5Y*
7.63%
10Y*
10.16%

XQQ.TO

1D
3.11%
1M
3.00%
YTD
17.28%
6M
16.08%
1Y
32.00%
3Y*
22.21%
5Y*
11.82%
10Y*
19.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		28.15%33.98%6.49%8.95%-20.56%-3.63%17.02%18.22%-15.31%37.26%
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		17.28%21.31%14.96%56.99%-37.11%22.83%49.67%44.89%-8.97%43.10%

Correlation

The correlation between EEM and XQQ.TO is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

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

0.70

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

0.61

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

0.60

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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2011

0.54

The correlation between EEM and XQQ.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (all time) to 0.70 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EEM
XQQ.TO

Technology

44.3%
53.7%

Financial Services

17.7%
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

8.3%
12.2%

Industrials

6.6%
3.1%

Communication Services

6.0%
15.8%

Basic Materials

5.9%
1.1%

Energy

3.4%
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

2.5%
7.7%

Healthcare

2.5%
4.2%

Utilities

1.8%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.0%
0.1%

Technology

EEM
44.3%
XQQ.TO
53.7%

Financial Services

EEM
17.7%
XQQ.TO
0.2%

Consumer Cyclical

EEM
8.3%
XQQ.TO
12.2%

Industrials

EEM
6.6%
XQQ.TO
3.1%

Communication Services

EEM
6.0%
XQQ.TO
15.8%

Basic Materials

EEM
5.9%
XQQ.TO
1.1%

Energy

EEM
3.4%
XQQ.TO
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

EEM
2.5%
XQQ.TO
7.7%

Healthcare

EEM
2.5%
XQQ.TO
4.2%

Utilities

EEM
1.8%
XQQ.TO
1.4%

Real Estate

EEM
1.0%
XQQ.TO
0.1%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF

iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)

Often compared with EEM:
EEM vs. VWOEEM vs. SPYEEM vs. IEMGEEM vs. IS3N.DEEEM vs. VXUSEEM vs. EEMSEEM vs. SPEM
Often compared with XQQ.TO:
XQQ.TO vs. QQC.TOXQQ.TO vs. VFV.TOXQQ.TO vs. HXQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. XQQU.TOXQQ.TO vs. QQQXQQ.TO vs. ZQQ.TOXQQ.TO vs. TEC.TO

Return for Risk

EEM vs. XQQ.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EEM
EEM Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
EEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEM Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
EEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEM Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO
XQQ.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
XQQ.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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.

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) and iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO). 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.

EEMXQQ.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.42
1.76

+0.66

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.09
2.32

+0.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.31

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.90

2.23

+1.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.36

8.14

+6.21

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is higher than the XQQ.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEM and XQQ.TO, 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...

Drawdowns

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEM drawdown since its inception was -66.43%, which is greater than XQQ.TO's maximum drawdown of -43.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEM and XQQ.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EEMXQQ.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.43%

-43.53%

-22.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.52%

-14.43%

+0.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.29%

-22.99%

+5.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.49%

-43.53%

+6.04%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.82%

-43.53%

+3.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.97%

-1.34%

+0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.00%

-7.79%

-8.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.66%

3.94%

-0.28%

Volatility

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) has a higher volatility of 11.26% compared to iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) (XQQ.TO) at 8.07%. This indicates that EEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XQQ.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EEMXQQ.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.26%

8.07%

+3.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.62%

14.68%

+4.94%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.84%

18.33%

+3.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.32%

23.54%

-4.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.67%

23.42%

-2.75%

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEM has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than XQQ.TO's 0.39% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEM vs. XQQ.TO - Dividend Comparison

EEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, more than XQQ.TO's 0.21% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEM
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF		2.24%2.22%2.43%2.63%2.50%1.99%1.45%2.76%2.24%1.89%1.89%2.49%
XQQ.TO
iShares NASDAQ 100 Index ETF (CAD-Hedged)		0.21%0.25%0.67%0.93%1.27%0.52%0.80%1.44%1.61%1.64%2.35%1.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

EEM and XQQ.TO have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, XQQ.TO is cheaper at 0.39% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

XQQ.TO is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for EEM.

EEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while XQQ.TO is Nasdaq-100. EEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net), while XQQ.TO tracks Morningstar US Market TR CAD. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for EEM and 0.39% for XQQ.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEM and XQQ.TO

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