PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EMIF vs. QAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EMIF vs. QAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) 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, 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%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EMIF vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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

41.1%
13.2%

Utilities

40.1%
2.6%

Energy

18.8%
3.3%

Basic Materials

-

12.7%

Communication Services

-

6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

0.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

0.7%

Financial Services

-

54.3%

Healthcare

-

0.8%

Real Estate

-

3.9%

Technology

-

0.5%

Industrials

EMIF
41.1%
QAT
13.2%

Utilities

EMIF
40.1%
QAT
2.6%

Energy

EMIF
18.8%
QAT
3.3%

Basic Materials

EMIF

-

QAT
12.7%

Communication Services

EMIF

-

QAT
6.7%

Consumer Cyclical

EMIF

-

QAT
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

EMIF

-

QAT
0.7%

Financial Services

EMIF

-

QAT
54.3%

Healthcare

EMIF

-

QAT
0.8%

Real Estate

EMIF

-

QAT
3.9%

Technology

EMIF

-

QAT
0.5%

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

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

EMIF
EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

QAT
QAT Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
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.

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.


EMIFQATDifference
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

EMIF vs. QAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EMIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is higher than the QAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EMIF 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EMIFQATDifference

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


EMIFQATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-12.45%

-12.80%

+0.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-15.91%

-19.18%

+3.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


EMIFQATDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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