EMIF vs. QAT
EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) and QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EMIF is a Infrastructure Equities fund tracking the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index, while QAT is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, EMIF returned 1.66%/yr vs 2.88%/yr for QAT. Their 0.28 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. 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 0.44% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's -4.44% return. Over the past 10 years, EMIF has underperformed QAT with an annualized return of 1.66%, while QAT has yielded a comparatively higher 2.88% annualized return.
EMIF
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- 6M
- -7.11%
- YTD
- 0.44%
- 1Y
- 16.15%
- 3Y*
- 10.24%
- 5Y*
- 5.68%
- 10Y*
- 1.66%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.28%
QAT
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- -3.26%
- 6M
- -8.76%
- YTD
- -4.44%
- 1Y
- -7.45%
- 3Y*
- 1.12%
- 5Y*
- 2.65%
- 10Y*
- 2.88%
- ALL TIME*
- 0.92%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $49.09K | $40.45K | $71.84K | |
| $941.21K | $596.55K | $1.10M |
EMIF vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF | 0.44% | 33.90% | 1.21% | 5.67% | -12.59% | 3.76% | -19.98% | 16.36% | -13.70% | 20.70% |
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF | -4.44% | 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 0.30, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.30 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.28 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.26 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 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.
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.
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.53 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.18 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 0.91 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.00 | -0.65 | +1.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.23 | -1.14 | +3.37 |
Loading charts...
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 | -15.71% | -11.48% | -4.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.70% | -15.47% | -1.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.29% | -33.17% | +9.88% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.02% | -34.04% | -13.98% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.57% | -16.32% | +2.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.89% | -19.10% | +3.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.00% | 6.53% | +0.47% |
Volatility
EMIF vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison
iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) has a higher volatility of 4.41% compared to iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) at 3.27%. This indicates that EMIF'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
| EMIF | QAT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.41% | 3.27% | +1.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.24% | 10.99% | +2.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.21% | 13.33% | +2.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.67% | 15.08% | +4.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.54% | 17.49% | +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 4.21%, less than QAT's 4.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF | 4.21% | 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 | 4.89% | 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 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EMIF has higher volatility (4.41%) compared to QAT (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EMIF dropped -48.02% vs QAT's -45.21%.
On 10-year performance, QAT leads with 2.88% vs 1.66% for EMIF. On fees, QAT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.27%. 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 2.88% return vs 1.66%. 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.
QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.89%, compared with 4.21% for EMIF.
EMIF is categorized as Infrastructure Equities, while QAT is Emerging Markets Equities. 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 (0.97 vs -0.56), 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