PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EEMV vs. XQLT.TO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

EEMV (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF) and XQLT.TO (iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EEMV is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while XQLT.TO is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EEMV returned 4.95%/yr vs 11.40%/yr for XQLT.TO. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EEMV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for XQLT.TO.

Performance

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF (XQLT.TO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EEMV achieves a 13.43% return, which is significantly higher than XQLT.TO's 7.62% return.

EEMV

1D
1.51%
1M
-1.16%
YTD
13.43%
6M
14.40%
1Y
20.63%
3Y*
12.52%
5Y*
4.95%
10Y*
6.37%

XQLT.TO

1D
0.20%
1M
1.74%
YTD
7.62%
6M
7.86%
1Y
19.06%
3Y*
19.12%
5Y*
11.40%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF		13.43%13.45%7.98%7.75%-13.94%5.05%6.90%2.71%
XQLT.TO
iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF		7.62%12.21%22.03%31.20%-22.09%27.96%14.32%10.82%

Correlation

The correlation between EEMV and XQLT.TO is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.48

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

0.38

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

0.35

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2019

0.30

The correlation between EEMV and XQLT.TO shifts across timeframes, from 0.30 (all time) to 0.48 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EEMV
XQLT.TO

Technology

28.9%
37.0%

Financial Services

17.7%
11.8%

Communication Services

11.2%
11.0%

Consumer Defensive

6.8%
4.9%

Industrials

6.7%
7.9%

Healthcare

6.2%
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%
9.3%

Utilities

4.6%
1.8%

Energy

3.4%
4.0%

Basic Materials

3.1%
1.7%

Real Estate

0.5%
1.8%

Technology

EEMV
28.9%
XQLT.TO
37.0%

Financial Services

EEMV
17.7%
XQLT.TO
11.8%

Communication Services

EEMV
11.2%
XQLT.TO
11.0%

Consumer Defensive

EEMV
6.8%
XQLT.TO
4.9%

Industrials

EEMV
6.7%
XQLT.TO
7.9%

Healthcare

EEMV
6.2%
XQLT.TO
8.8%

Consumer Cyclical

EEMV
5.0%
XQLT.TO
9.3%

Utilities

EEMV
4.6%
XQLT.TO
1.8%

Energy

EEMV
3.4%
XQLT.TO
4.0%

Basic Materials

EEMV
3.1%
XQLT.TO
1.7%

Real Estate

EEMV
0.5%
XQLT.TO
1.8%

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 Min Vol Factor ETF

iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF

Often compared with EEMV:
EEMV vs. EEMEEMV vs. IEMGEEMV vs. SPYEEMV vs. EFAVEEMV vs. MCHIEEMV vs. USMVEEMV vs. SPEM
Often compared with XQLT.TO:
XQLT.TO vs. XVLU.TOXQLT.TO vs. HYLD.TOXQLT.TO vs. VOOXQLT.TO vs. SPYXQLT.TO vs. VFV.TOXQLT.TO vs. ZSP.TOXQLT.TO vs. XGRO.TO

Return for Risk

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EEMV
EEMV Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
EEMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EEMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
EEMV Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
EEMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
EEMV Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
XQLT.TO
XQLT.TO Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
XQLT.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XQLT.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
XQLT.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
XQLT.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
XQLT.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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.

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) and iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF (XQLT.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.

EEMVXQLT.TODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.48
1.49

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.04
2.16

-0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.27

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.25

2.20

+0.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.21

9.59

-1.38

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EEMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the XQLT.TO Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EEMV and XQLT.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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

EEMVXQLT.TODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

1.49

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.68

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.37

0.79

-0.42

Drawdowns

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EEMV drawdown since its inception was -31.56%, roughly equal to the maximum XQLT.TO drawdown of -30.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EEMV and XQLT.TO.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EEMVXQLT.TODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.56%

-30.79%

-0.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.22%

-8.71%

-0.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.47%

-18.76%

+6.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.90%

-29.57%

+7.67%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.56%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.70%

-2.60%

-2.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.97%

-6.15%

-1.82%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.52%

1.99%

+0.53%

Volatility

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF (EEMV) has a higher volatility of 7.37% compared to iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF (XQLT.TO) at 4.08%. This indicates that EEMV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XQLT.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

EEMVXQLT.TODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.37%

4.08%

+3.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.79%

9.97%

+2.82%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.01%

12.84%

+1.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.06%

16.91%

-4.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.94%

18.00%

-4.06%

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EEMV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than XQLT.TO's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

EEMV vs. XQLT.TO - Dividend Comparison

EEMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.33%, more than XQLT.TO's 0.64% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EEMV
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Min Vol Factor ETF		2.33%2.65%3.50%2.75%1.93%2.14%2.45%2.63%2.46%2.34%2.79%2.55%
XQLT.TO
iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor Index ETF		0.64%0.69%0.72%0.94%1.21%0.87%1.11%1.23%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

EEMV and XQLT.TO have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, EEMV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

EEMV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for XQLT.TO.

EEMV is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while XQLT.TO is Large Cap Growth Equities. EEMV tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index, while XQLT.TO tracks MSCI USA Sector Neutral Quality Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for EEMV and 0.32% for XQLT.TO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EEMV and XQLT.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