EQLT vs. QLV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EQLT (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF) and QLV (FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund) are both Quality Factor funds - EQLT tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index while QLV tracks the Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, EQLT returned 44.38% vs 16.12% for QLV. Their 0.37 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EQLT charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for QLV.

Performance

EQLT vs. QLV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EQLT achieves a 22.86% return, which is significantly higher than QLV's 9.01% return.

EQLT

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -1.35%
• 6M: 14.71%
• YTD: 22.86%
• 1Y: 44.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 29.13%

QLV

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.40%
• 6M: 6.81%
• YTD: 9.01%
• 1Y: 16.12%
• 3Y*: 14.76%
• 5Y*: 9.98%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.61%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	$77.09K	$55.23K	$122.39K
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund	$433.57K	$400.63K	$648.84K

EQLT vs. QLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	22.86%	33.93%	-1.29%
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund	9.01%	12.28%	1.76%

Correlation

The correlation between EQLT and QLV is 0.34, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 6, 2024	0.37

EQLT vs. QLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EQLT	QLV
Technology	34.8%	30.2%
Financial Services	19.5%	12.3%
Industrials	11.4%	6.3%
Consumer Cyclical	8.2%	6.4%
Basic Materials	6.5%	1.3%
Communication Services	5.2%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	7.8%
Energy	3.5%	6.5%
Healthcare	3.3%	14.1%
Utilities	1.8%	6.4%
Real Estate	0.9%	1.4%

Return for Risk

EQLT vs. QLV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EQLT

EQLT Risk / Return Rank: 81
EQLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EQLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
EQLT Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EQLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EQLT Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QLV

QLV Risk / Return Rank: 82
QLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
QLV Omega Ratio Rank: 84
QLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
QLV Martin Ratio Rank: 80

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

EQLT vs. QLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT) and FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV). 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	QLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	1.99	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	2.93	-0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.36	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.61	2.53	+1.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.91	10.43	+0.49

EQLT vs. QLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQLT Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is comparable to the QLV Sharpe Ratio of 1.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQLT and QLV, 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. QLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQLT drawdown since its inception was -17.38%, smaller than the maximum QLV drawdown of -33.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQLT and QLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQLT	QLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.38%	-33.71%	+16.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.00%	-6.19%	-5.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.36%	-0.43%	-7.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.81%	-3.93%	+0.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.96%	1.50%	+2.46%

Volatility

EQLT vs. QLV - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF (EQLT) has a higher volatility of 5.98% compared to FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund (QLV) at 2.64%. This indicates that EQLT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EQLT	QLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.98%	2.64%	+3.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.15%	5.96%	+15.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.39%	7.88%	+15.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.25%	12.63%	+8.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.25%	16.43%	+4.82%

EQLT vs. QLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQLT has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than QLV's 0.22% expense ratio.

Dividends

EQLT vs. QLV - Dividend Comparison

EQLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.85%, more than QLV's 1.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EQLT iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor ETF	2.85%	3.10%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QLV FlexShares US Quality Low Volatility Index Fund	1.52%	1.60%	1.66%	1.60%	1.74%	0.96%	1.24%	0.58%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQLT and QLV in my portfolio?

EQLT and QLV have a correlation of 0.34, 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 QLV?

EQLT has higher volatility (5.98%) compared to QLV (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQLT dropped -17.38% vs QLV's -33.71%.

Which ETF is better, EQLT or QLV?

On 1-year performance, EQLT leads with 44.38% vs 16.12% for QLV. On fees, QLV is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, QLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EQLT or QLV?

Over the 1-year period, EQLT has performed better with a 44.38% return vs 16.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EQLT or QLV?

QLV is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for EQLT.

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

EQLT has the higher dividend yield at 2.85%, compared with 1.52% for QLV.

What is the main difference between EQLT and QLV?

EQLT tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Quality Factor Select Index, while QLV tracks Northern Trust Quality Low Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Northern Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for EQLT and 0.22% for QLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.99 vs 1.85), 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.