EMCS vs. EQLT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) and EQLT (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMCS tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index while EQLT tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EMCS returned 55.24% vs 53.56% for EQLT. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EMCS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for EQLT.

Performance

EMCS vs. EQLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EMCS achieves a 30.08% return, which is significantly higher than EQLT's 27.04% return.

EMCS

• 1D: -6.03%
• 1M: 5.49%
• YTD: 30.08%
• 6M: 31.16%
• 1Y: 55.24%
• 3Y*: 26.52%
• 5Y*: 7.51%
• 10Y*: —

EQLT

• 1D: -4.53%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 27.04%
• 6M: 27.81%
• 1Y: 53.56%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMCS vs. EQLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	30.08%	38.71%	0.28%
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	27.04%	33.93%	-1.29%

Correlation

The correlation between EMCS and EQLT is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2024	0.93

The correlation between EMCS and EQLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

EMCS vs. EQLT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EMCS	EQLT
Technology	50.7%	36.1%
Financial Services	26.0%	17.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.1%	10.1%
Communication Services	7.4%	6.3%
Basic Materials	2.6%	6.8%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.2%
Industrials	1.2%	10.8%
Energy	1.2%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	3.2%
Healthcare	0.0%	2.6%
Utilities	0.0%	1.9%

Return for Risk

EMCS vs. EQLT — Risk / Return Rank

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

EMCS

EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 75
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 76
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 80

EQLT

EQLT Risk / Return Rank: 81
EQLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EQLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
EQLT Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EQLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
EQLT Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

EMCS vs. EQLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT). 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.

	EMCS	EQLT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	2.36	-0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	3.00	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.43	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.88	4.49	-0.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.31	17.33	-3.03

EMCS vs. EQLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMCS Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the EQLT Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMCS and EQLT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EMCS vs. EQLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMCS drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, which is greater than EQLT's maximum drawdown of -17.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMCS and EQLT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EMCS	EQLT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.86%	-17.38%	-27.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.32%	-12.00%	-2.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-42.06%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.03%	-5.24%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.52%	-3.59%	-12.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.87%	3.10%	+0.77%

Volatility

EMCS vs. EQLT - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a higher volatility of 14.09% compared to iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT) at 10.59%. This indicates that EMCS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EMCS	EQLT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.09%	10.59%	+3.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.01%	20.74%	+2.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.41%	22.82%	+2.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.33%	21.35%	-0.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.04%	21.35%	+0.69%

EMCS vs. EQLT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMCS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than EQLT's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMCS vs. EQLT - Dividend Comparison

EMCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than EQLT's 2.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	1.46%	1.66%	0.67%	3.07%	2.26%	1.46%	1.40%	3.56%
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	2.62%	3.10%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EMCS and EQLT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, EMCS and EQLT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EMCS or EQLT?

EMCS has higher volatility (14.09%) compared to EQLT (10.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMCS dropped -44.86% vs EQLT's -17.38%.

Which ETF is better, EMCS or EQLT?

On 1-year performance, EMCS leads with 55.24% vs 53.56% for EQLT. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, EQLT has been the lower-risk option at 10.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EMCS or EQLT?

Over the 1-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 55.24% return vs 53.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EMCS or EQLT?

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQLT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EMCS or EQLT?

EQLT has the higher dividend yield at 2.62%, compared with 1.46% for EMCS.

What is the main difference between EMCS and EQLT?

EMCS tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index, while EQLT tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for EMCS and 0.35% for EQLT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQLT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.19), 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.