EQLT vs. EMIF

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EQLT (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF) and EMIF (iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds from iShares - EQLT tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index while EMIF tracks the S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EQLT returned 61.62% vs 22.10% for EMIF. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EQLT charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for EMIF.

Performance

EQLT vs. EMIF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQLT achieves a 33.07% return, which is significantly higher than EMIF's 1.64% return.

EQLT

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: 5.30%
• YTD: 33.07%
• 6M: 34.67%
• 1Y: 61.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMIF

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: -1.61%
• YTD: 1.64%
• 6M: 1.44%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: 11.82%
• 5Y*: 5.01%
• 10Y*: 2.46%

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

EQLT vs. EMIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	33.07%	33.93%	-1.29%
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF	1.64%	33.90%	-2.86%

Correlation

The correlation between EQLT and EMIF is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2024	0.58

The correlation between EQLT and EMIF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

EQLT vs. EMIF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EQLT	EMIF
Technology	36.1%	-
Financial Services	17.4%	-
Industrials	10.8%	42.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	-
Basic Materials	6.8%	-
Communication Services	6.3%	-
Energy	3.7%	19.3%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	-
Healthcare	2.6%	-
Utilities	1.9%	38.7%
Real Estate	1.2%	-

Return for Risk

EQLT vs. EMIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQLT

EQLT Risk / Return Rank: 87
EQLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
EQLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
EQLT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EQLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
EQLT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

EMIF

EMIF Risk / Return Rank: 36
EMIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
EMIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
EMIF Omega Ratio Rank: 40
EMIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
EMIF Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

EQLT vs. EMIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	EQLT	EMIF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.77	1.39	+1.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.48	2.01	+1.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.26	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.16	1.43	+3.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.06	4.28	+15.78

EQLT vs. EMIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQLT Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is higher than the EMIF Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQLT and EMIF, 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

EQLT vs. EMIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQLT drawdown since its inception was -17.38%, smaller than the maximum EMIF drawdown of -48.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQLT and EMIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQLT	EMIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.38%	-48.02%	+30.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.00%	-15.57%	+3.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.70%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-48.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.75%	-12.54%	+11.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.58%	-15.90%	+12.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.08%	5.18%	-2.10%

Volatility

EQLT vs. EMIF - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT) has a higher volatility of 9.50% compared to iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF (EMIF) at 5.64%. This indicates that EQLT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EMIF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EQLT	EMIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.50%	5.64%	+3.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.19%	13.47%	+6.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.37%	16.03%	+6.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.09%	19.73%	+1.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.09%	20.62%	+0.47%

EQLT vs. EMIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQLT has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than EMIF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

EQLT vs. EMIF - Dividend Comparison

EQLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than EMIF's 4.16% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMIF iShares Emerging Markets Infrastructure ETF	4.16%	4.96%	4.12%	2.64%	3.08%	3.94%	2.54%	2.07%	2.64%	2.58%	3.16%	2.07%
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	2.51%	3.10%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQLT and EMIF in my portfolio?

EQLT and EMIF have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EQLT or EMIF?

EQLT has higher volatility (9.50%) compared to EMIF (5.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQLT dropped -17.38% vs EMIF's -48.02%.

Which ETF is better, EQLT or EMIF?

On 1-year performance, EQLT leads with 61.62% vs 22.10% for EMIF. On fees, EQLT is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, EMIF has been the lower-risk option at 5.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EQLT or EMIF?

Over the 1-year period, EQLT has performed better with a 61.62% return vs 22.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EQLT or EMIF?

EQLT is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for EMIF.

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

EMIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.16%, compared with 2.51% for EQLT.

What is the main difference between EQLT and EMIF?

EQLT tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index, while EMIF tracks S&P Emerging Markets Infrastructure Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EQLT and 0.75% for EMIF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQLT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 1.39), 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.