PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IEMG vs. QAI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IEMG vs. QAI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) and IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IEMG achieves a 18.97% return, which is significantly higher than QAI's 7.58% return. Over the past 10 years, IEMG has outperformed QAI with an annualized return of 9.88%, while QAI has yielded a comparatively lower 3.79% annualized return.


IEMG

1D
1.70%
1M
-3.66%
YTD
18.97%
6M
20.80%
1Y
40.80%
3Y*
20.51%
5Y*
6.57%
10Y*
9.88%

QAI

1D
0.42%
1M
-0.22%
YTD
7.58%
6M
8.00%
1Y
14.10%
3Y*
9.67%
5Y*
4.31%
10Y*
3.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IEMG vs. QAI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
18.97%32.56%6.50%11.52%-19.98%-0.64%17.87%17.81%-14.92%37.38%
QAI
IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF
7.58%8.29%6.67%10.07%-8.68%-0.16%5.73%8.68%-3.32%6.17%

Correlation

The correlation between IEMG and QAI is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.85

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2012

0.74

The correlation between IEMG and QAI shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (all time) to 0.85 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IEMG vs. QAI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IEMG
QAI

Technology

35.0%
21.9%

Financial Services

18.4%
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

9.5%
7.3%

Industrials

9.0%
13.6%

Basic Materials

6.9%
5.3%

Communication Services

6.4%
11.2%

Energy

3.8%
3.7%

Healthcare

3.7%
7.1%

Consumer Defensive

3.3%
3.7%

Utilities

2.2%
3.8%

Real Estate

1.7%
2.9%

Technology

IEMG
35.0%
QAI
21.9%

Financial Services

IEMG
18.4%
QAI
19.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IEMG
9.5%
QAI
7.3%

Industrials

IEMG
9.0%
QAI
13.6%

Basic Materials

IEMG
6.9%
QAI
5.3%

Communication Services

IEMG
6.4%
QAI
11.2%

Energy

IEMG
3.8%
QAI
3.7%

Healthcare

IEMG
3.7%
QAI
7.1%

Consumer Defensive

IEMG
3.3%
QAI
3.7%

Utilities

IEMG
2.2%
QAI
3.8%

Real Estate

IEMG
1.7%
QAI
2.9%

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

IEMG vs. QAI — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEMG
IEMG Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
IEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
IEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
IEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
IEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

QAI
QAI Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
QAI Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
QAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
QAI Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

IEMG vs. QAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) and IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI). 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.


IEMGQAIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.45

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.10

3.81

-0.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.68

15.45

-3.77

IEMG vs. QAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEMG Sharpe Ratio is 1.99, which is comparable to the QAI Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEMG and QAI, 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


IEMGQAIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.99

2.26

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.66

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.49

0.61

-0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.33

0.56

-0.23

Drawdowns

IEMG vs. QAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEMG drawdown since its inception was -38.71%, which is greater than QAI's maximum drawdown of -14.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEMG and QAI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IEMGQAIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.71%

-14.95%

-23.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.21%

-3.71%

-9.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.21%

-7.78%

-9.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.75%

-14.32%

-21.43%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.71%

-14.95%

-23.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.00%

-1.72%

-5.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.97%

-2.57%

-10.40%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.50%

0.91%

+2.59%

Volatility

IEMG vs. QAI - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (IEMG) has a higher volatility of 10.33% compared to IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF (QAI) at 2.56%. This indicates that IEMG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IEMGQAIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.33%

2.56%

+7.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.35%

5.25%

+13.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

20.62%

6.26%

+14.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.62%

6.60%

+12.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.14%

6.19%

+13.95%

IEMG vs. QAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEMG has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than QAI's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

IEMG vs. QAI - Dividend Comparison

IEMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.31%, more than QAI's 1.40% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IEMG
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF
2.31%2.75%3.20%2.89%2.71%3.06%1.87%3.15%2.76%2.35%2.28%2.53%
QAI
IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Tracker ETF
1.40%1.50%2.22%4.08%2.00%0.28%1.98%1.91%1.90%0.00%0.00%0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


IEMG and QAI have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IEMG has higher volatility (10.33%) compared to QAI (2.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEMG dropped -38.71% vs QAI's -14.95%.

On 10-year performance, IEMG leads with 9.88% vs 3.79% for QAI. On fees, IEMG is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, QAI has been the lower-risk option at 2.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, IEMG has performed better with a 9.88% return vs 3.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IEMG is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QAI.

IEMG has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 1.40% for QAI.

IEMG is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while QAI is Long-Short. IEMG tracks MSCI Emerging Markets Investable Market Index (USD) (Net), while QAI tracks IQ Hedge Multi-Strategy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and New York Life. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for IEMG and 0.79% for QAI.

QAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.99), 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 IEMG and QAI

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