EMIF vs. QAT
EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) and QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - EMIF tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index while QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMIF returned 2.36%/yr vs 4.31%/yr for QAT. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EMIF charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QAT.
Performance
EMIF vs. QAT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EMIF achieves a 1.74% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's -0.42% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed QAT with an annualized return of 2.36%, while QAT has yielded a comparatively higher 4.31% annualized return.
EMIF
- 1D
- -1.54%
- 1M
- -6.56%
- YTD
- 1.74%
- 6M
- 0.79%
- 1Y
- 21.17%
- 3Y*
- 11.48%
- 5Y*
- 4.93%
- 10Y*
- 2.36%
QAT
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- -0.79%
- YTD
- -0.42%
- 6M
- 0.19%
- 1Y
- 1.83%
- 3Y*
- 3.96%
- 5Y*
- 3.38%
- 10Y*
- 4.31%
EMIF vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF | 1.74% | 33.90% | 1.21% | 5.67% | -12.59% | 3.76% | -19.98% | 16.36% | -13.70% | 20.70% |
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF | -0.42% | 8.81% | 5.20% | 2.72% | -7.23% | 14.42% | 6.94% | -0.44% | 20.03% | -11.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between EMIF and QAT is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2014 | 0.28 |
EMIF vs. QAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EMIF
QAT
Industrials
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Industrials
EMIF
QAT
Utilities
EMIF
QAT
Energy
EMIF
QAT
Basic Materials
EMIF
-
QAT
Communication Services
EMIF
-
QAT
Consumer Cyclical
EMIF
-
QAT
Consumer Defensive
EMIF
-
QAT
Financial Services
EMIF
-
QAT
Healthcare
EMIF
-
QAT
Real Estate
EMIF
-
QAT
Technology
EMIF
-
QAT
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
EMIF vs. QAT — Risk / Return Rank
EMIF
QAT
EMIF vs. QAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) 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.
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.71 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.04 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.71 | 0.17 | +1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.92 | 0.33 | +4.59 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.38 | 0.14 | +1.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.25 | 0.23 | +0.03 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.12 | 0.25 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.17 | 0.07 | +0.10 |
Drawdowns
EMIF vs. QAT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EMIF drawdown since its inception was -48.02%, which is greater than QAT's maximum drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EMIF and QAT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -48.02% | -45.21% | -2.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.45% | -10.60% | -1.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.70% | -17.41% | +0.71% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.68% | -33.17% | +9.49% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.02% | -34.04% | -13.98% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.45% | -12.80% | +0.35% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.91% | -19.18% | +3.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.31% | 5.54% | -1.23% |
Volatility
EMIF vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) is 4.38%, while iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) has a volatility of 5.03%. This indicates that EMIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.38% | 5.03% | -0.65% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.97% | 10.46% | +2.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.41% | 13.36% | +2.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.67% | 15.00% | +4.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.61% | 17.56% | +3.05% |
EMIF vs. QAT - Expense Ratio Comparison
EMIF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than QAT's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
EMIF vs. QAT - Dividend Comparison
EMIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.87%, more than QAT's 3.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF | 4.87% | 4.96% | 4.12% | 2.64% | 3.08% | 3.94% | 2.54% | 2.07% | 2.64% | 2.58% | 3.16% | 2.07% |
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF | 3.52% | 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
EMIF and QAT have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QAT has higher volatility (5.03%) compared to EMIF (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs QAT's -45.21%.
On 10-year performance, QAT leads with 4.31% vs 2.36% for EMIF. On fees, QAT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, QAT has performed better with a 4.31% return vs 2.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QAT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.
EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.87%, compared with 3.52% for QAT.
EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for EMIF and 0.59% for QAT.
EMIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 0.14), 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.
Find the right allocation for EMIF 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