QAT vs. EDEN

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) and EDEN (iShares MSCI Denmark ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QAT is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while EDEN is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QAT returned 4.48%/yr vs 9.34%/yr for EDEN. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QAT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.53%/yr for EDEN.

Performance

QAT vs. EDEN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QAT achieves a 1.40% return, which is significantly higher than EDEN's -3.26% return. Over the past 10 years, QAT has underperformed EDEN with an annualized return of 4.48%, while EDEN has yielded a comparatively higher 9.34% annualized return.

QAT

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 2.48%
• YTD: 1.40%
• 6M: 1.29%
• 1Y: 8.99%
• 3Y*: 5.98%
• 5Y*: 3.69%
• 10Y*: 4.48%

EDEN

• 1D: 2.17%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: -3.26%
• 6M: -1.59%
• 1Y: -1.90%
• 3Y*: 3.26%
• 5Y*: 2.39%
• 10Y*: 9.34%

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

QAT vs. EDEN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	1.40%	8.81%	5.20%	2.72%	-7.23%	14.42%	6.94%	-0.44%	20.03%	-11.66%
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF	-3.26%	10.58%	-3.94%	17.99%	-11.47%	14.81%	42.56%	24.37%	-14.43%	35.39%

Correlation

The correlation between QAT and EDEN is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.24
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2014	0.22

The correlation between QAT and EDEN shifts across timeframes, from 0.21 (10 years) to 0.33 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QAT vs. EDEN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QAT	EDEN
Financial Services	55.5%	15.8%
Basic Materials	12.6%	4.7%
Industrials	8.4%	29.4%
Energy	7.6%	1.0%
Communication Services	6.3%	-
Real Estate	4.0%	-
Utilities	2.5%	3.2%
Technology	1.0%	0.9%
Healthcare	0.8%	36.0%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	4.7%

Return for Risk

QAT vs. EDEN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QAT

QAT Risk / Return Rank: 19
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 20
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 16

EDEN

EDEN Risk / Return Rank: 8
EDEN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
EDEN Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
EDEN Omega Ratio Rank: 7
EDEN Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
EDEN Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

QAT vs. EDEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN). 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.

	QAT	EDEN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.68	-0.09	+0.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	0.02	+1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.00	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	-0.09	+0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.57	-0.19	+1.76

QAT vs. EDEN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QAT Sharpe Ratio is 0.68, which is higher than the EDEN Sharpe Ratio of -0.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QAT and EDEN, 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

QAT vs. EDEN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QAT drawdown since its inception was -45.21%, which is greater than EDEN's maximum drawdown of -36.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QAT and EDEN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QAT	EDEN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.21%	-36.61%	-8.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.60%	-21.17%	+10.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.41%	-29.31%	+11.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.17%	-36.61%	+3.44%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.04%	-36.61%	+2.57%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.21%	-13.74%	+2.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.15%	-7.38%	-11.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.74%	9.78%	-4.04%

Volatility

QAT vs. EDEN - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) has a higher volatility of 5.69% compared to iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) at 4.82%. This indicates that QAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QAT	EDEN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.69%	4.82%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.07%	15.74%	-4.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.27%	20.76%	-7.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.07%	20.28%	-5.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.56%	19.38%	-1.82%

QAT vs. EDEN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QAT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than EDEN's 0.53% expense ratio.

Dividends

QAT vs. EDEN - Dividend Comparison

QAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.61%, more than EDEN's 3.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF	3.17%	2.79%	1.50%	1.92%	1.47%	0.74%	0.42%	2.36%	2.01%	2.03%	1.28%	1.46%
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	4.61%	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

Can I hold both QAT and EDEN in my portfolio?

QAT and EDEN have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QAT or EDEN?

QAT has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to EDEN (4.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QAT dropped -45.21% vs EDEN's -36.61%.

Which ETF is better, QAT or EDEN?

On 10-year performance, EDEN leads with 9.34% vs 4.48% for QAT. On fees, EDEN is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, EDEN has been the lower-risk option at 4.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QAT or EDEN?

Over the 10-year period, EDEN has performed better with a 9.34% return vs 4.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QAT or EDEN?

EDEN is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QAT or EDEN?

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.61%, compared with 3.17% for EDEN.

What is the main difference between QAT and EDEN?

QAT is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EDEN is Europe Equities. QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while EDEN tracks MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QAT and 0.53% for EDEN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.68 vs -0.09), 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.