PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
EMCS vs. QAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

EMCS vs. QAT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) and QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - EMCS tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index while QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EMCS returned 7.51%/yr vs 3.56%/yr for QAT. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMCS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QAT.

Performance

EMCS vs. QAT - 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 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, EMCS achieves a 30.08% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's 1.01% return.

EMCS

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

QAT

1D
-0.39%
1M
2.08%
YTD
1.01%
6M
0.41%
1Y
7.11%
3Y*
5.84%
5Y*
3.56%
10Y*
4.43%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMCS vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF		30.08%38.71%10.12%5.68%-23.58%-2.02%19.72%19.54%-1.41%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF		1.01%8.81%5.20%2.72%-7.23%14.42%6.94%-0.44%-2.38%

Correlation

The correlation between EMCS and QAT is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.32

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

0.32

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

0.33

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2018

0.35

EMCS vs. QAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
EMCS
QAT

Technology

50.7%
1.0%

Financial Services

26.0%
55.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.1%
0.7%

Communication Services

7.4%
6.3%

Basic Materials

2.6%
12.6%

Real Estate

1.8%
4.0%

Industrials

1.2%
8.4%

Energy

1.2%
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

0.0%
0.6%

Healthcare

0.0%
0.8%

Utilities

0.0%
2.5%

Technology

EMCS
50.7%
QAT
1.0%

Financial Services

EMCS
26.0%
QAT
55.5%

Consumer Cyclical

EMCS
9.1%
QAT
0.7%

Communication Services

EMCS
7.4%
QAT
6.3%

Basic Materials

EMCS
2.6%
QAT
12.6%

Real Estate

EMCS
1.8%
QAT
4.0%

Industrials

EMCS
1.2%
QAT
8.4%

Energy

EMCS
1.2%
QAT
7.6%

Consumer Defensive

EMCS
0.0%
QAT
0.6%

Healthcare

EMCS
0.0%
QAT
0.8%

Utilities

EMCS
0.0%
QAT
2.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF

iShares MSCI Qatar ETF

Often compared with EMCS:
EMCS vs. SNPDEMCS vs. TDECEMCS vs. FEMEMCS vs. BHYBEMCS vs. EDOGEMCS vs. SCHEEMCS vs. VWO
Often compared with QAT:
QAT vs. UAEQAT vs. KSAQAT vs. ENORQAT vs. SJMQAT vs. EDENQAT vs. VOOQAT vs. EIRL

Return for Risk

EMCS vs. QAT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
EMCS
EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
QAT
QAT Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
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.

EMCS vs. QAT - 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 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.

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.

EMCSQATDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.19
0.54

+1.64

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.77
0.87

+1.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.11

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.88

0.67

+3.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.31

1.24

+13.07

EMCS vs. QAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMCS Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is higher than the QAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMCS 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...

Drawdowns

EMCS vs. QAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EMCS drawdown since its inception was -44.86%, roughly equal to the maximum QAT drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMCS and QAT.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

EMCSQATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.86%

-45.21%

+0.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.32%

-10.60%

-3.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.73%

-17.41%

+0.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-42.06%

-33.17%

-8.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-34.04%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.03%

-11.55%

+5.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.52%

-19.14%

+2.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.87%

5.75%

-1.88%

Volatility

EMCS vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a higher volatility of 14.09% compared to iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) at 5.72%. This indicates that EMCS'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

EMCSQATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.09%

5.72%

+8.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

23.01%

11.06%

+11.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.41%

13.25%

+12.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.33%

15.06%

+6.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.04%

17.54%

+4.50%

EMCS vs. QAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EMCS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than QAT's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

EMCS vs. QAT - Dividend Comparison

EMCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than QAT's 4.63% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EMCS
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF		1.46%1.66%0.67%3.07%2.26%1.46%1.40%3.56%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QAT
iShares MSCI Qatar ETF		4.63%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

EMCS and QAT have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EMCS has higher volatility (14.09%) compared to QAT (5.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMCS dropped -44.86% vs QAT's -45.21%.

On 5-year performance, EMCS leads with 7.51% vs 3.56% for QAT. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 5.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 7.51% return vs 3.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.63%, compared with 1.46% for EMCS.

EMCS tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index, while QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for EMCS and 0.59% for QAT.

EMCS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 0.54), 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 EMCS 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