IQSZ vs. EMCS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

IQSZ (Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF) and EMCS (Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IQSZ is a ESG fund actively managed by Invesco, while EMCS is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Select Index. IQSZ is actively managed, while EMCS is passively managed. Over the past year, IQSZ returned 28.75% vs 40.24% for EMCS. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IQSZ charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for EMCS.

Performance

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF (IQSZ) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IQSZ achieves a 13.58% return, which is significantly lower than EMCS's 23.30% return.

IQSZ

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: -0.86%
• 6M: 10.99%
• YTD: 13.58%
• 1Y: 28.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMCS

• 1D: -2.52%
• 1M: -6.45%
• 6M: 16.44%
• YTD: 23.30%
• 1Y: 40.24%
• 3Y*: 22.49%
• 5Y*: 6.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IQSZ Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF	13.58%	13.36%
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	23.30%	14.54%

Correlation

The correlation between IQSZ and EMCS is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 16, 2025	0.80

The correlation between IQSZ and EMCS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IQSZ vs. EMCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IQSZ

IQSZ Risk / Return Rank: 79
IQSZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
IQSZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
IQSZ Omega Ratio Rank: 77
IQSZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
IQSZ Martin Ratio Rank: 85

EMCS

EMCS Risk / Return Rank: 61
EMCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
EMCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
EMCS Omega Ratio Rank: 59
EMCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
EMCS Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF (IQSZ) and Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS). 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.

	IQSZ	EMCS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	1.53	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.82	2.06	+0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.29	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	2.82	+0.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.42	9.39	+4.02

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQSZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is higher than the EMCS Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQSZ and EMCS, 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

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQSZ drawdown since its inception was -9.12%, smaller than the maximum EMCS drawdown of -44.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQSZ and EMCS.

Drawdown Indicators

	IQSZ	EMCS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.12%	-44.86%	+35.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.12%	-14.32%	+5.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.73%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-39.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.16%	-10.93%	+9.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-16.44%	+15.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.15%	4.30%	-2.15%

Volatility

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF (IQSZ) is 3.76%, while Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF (EMCS) has a volatility of 11.17%. This indicates that IQSZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IQSZ	EMCS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	11.17%	-7.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.82%	24.08%	-12.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.07%	26.41%	-12.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.07%	21.56%	-7.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.07%	22.14%	-8.07%

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQSZ has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than EMCS's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IQSZ vs. EMCS - Dividend Comparison

IQSZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, more than EMCS's 1.54% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EMCS Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets Climate Selection ETF	1.54%	1.66%	0.67%	3.07%	2.26%	1.46%	1.40%	3.56%
IQSZ Invesco Global Equity Net Zero ETF	1.77%	1.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IQSZ and EMCS in my portfolio?

IQSZ and EMCS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IQSZ or EMCS?

EMCS has higher volatility (11.17%) compared to IQSZ (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQSZ dropped -9.12% vs EMCS's -44.86%.

Which ETF is better, IQSZ or EMCS?

On 1-year performance, EMCS leads with 40.24% vs 28.75% for IQSZ. On fees, EMCS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, IQSZ has been the lower-risk option at 3.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IQSZ or EMCS?

Over the 1-year period, EMCS has performed better with a 40.24% return vs 28.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IQSZ or EMCS?

EMCS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for IQSZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IQSZ or EMCS?

IQSZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 1.54% for EMCS.

What is the main difference between IQSZ and EMCS?

IQSZ is categorized as ESG, while EMCS is Emerging Markets Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IQSZ and 0.15% for EMCS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQSZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.53), 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.