QAT vs. FTHF

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) and FTHF (First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index while FTHF tracks the Emerging Markets Human Flourishing Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, QAT returned -5.50% vs 79.54% for FTHF. Their 0.33 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QAT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FTHF.

Performance

QAT vs. FTHF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QAT achieves a -1.83% return, which is significantly lower than FTHF's 40.11% return.

QAT

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: -2.43%
• 6M: -7.44%
• YTD: -1.83%
• 1Y: -5.50%
• 3Y*: 2.83%
• 5Y*: 2.98%
• 10Y*: 3.16%
• ALL TIME*: 1.14%

FTHF

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: -5.56%
• 6M: 22.85%
• YTD: 40.11%
• 1Y: 79.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 39.60%

*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)
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	$406.11K	$539.78K	$545.31K
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	$500.62K	$592.29K	$1.11M

QAT vs. FTHF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	-1.83%	8.81%	5.20%	10.89%
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	40.11%	65.30%	-8.14%	18.14%

Correlation

The correlation between QAT and FTHF is 0.36, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2023	0.33

QAT vs. FTHF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QAT	FTHF
Financial Services	55.7%	25.0%
Basic Materials	11.9%	7.5%
Industrials	8.6%	5.4%
Energy	7.7%	4.6%
Communication Services	6.4%	0.8%
Real Estate	3.9%	-
Utilities	2.5%	1.8%
Technology	1.0%	50.9%
Healthcare	0.8%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	0.8%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	0.7%	3.0%

Return for Risk

QAT vs. FTHF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QAT

QAT Risk / Return Rank: 5
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 5
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 5

FTHF

FTHF Risk / Return Rank: 84
FTHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FTHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FTHF Omega Ratio Rank: 84
FTHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FTHF Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

QAT vs. FTHF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF). 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	FTHF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.41	2.32	-2.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.51	2.80	-3.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.40	-0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.48	3.80	-4.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.83	12.91	-13.74

QAT vs. FTHF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.41, which is lower than the FTHF Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QAT and FTHF, 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. FTHF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QAT drawdown since its inception was -45.21%, which is greater than FTHF's maximum drawdown of -21.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QAT and FTHF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QAT	FTHF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.21%	-21.05%	-24.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.48%	-21.05%	+9.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.03%	-12.35%	-1.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.10%	-4.57%	-14.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.61%	6.18%	+0.43%

Volatility

QAT vs. FTHF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) is 3.04%, while First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) has a volatility of 13.20%. This indicates that QAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QAT	FTHF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.04%	13.20%	-10.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.06%	32.01%	-20.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.45%	34.40%	-20.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.10%	27.92%	-12.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.50%	27.92%	-10.42%

QAT vs. FTHF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QAT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than FTHF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

QAT vs. FTHF - Dividend Comparison

QAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.76%, more than FTHF's 3.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	3.25%	4.40%	3.34%	0.51%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	4.76%	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 FTHF in my portfolio?

QAT and FTHF have a correlation of 0.36, 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 FTHF?

FTHF has higher volatility (13.20%) compared to QAT (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QAT dropped -45.21% vs FTHF's -21.05%.

Which ETF is better, QAT or FTHF?

On 1-year performance, FTHF leads with 79.54% vs -5.50% for QAT. On fees, QAT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QAT or FTHF?

Over the 1-year period, FTHF has performed better with a 79.54% return vs -5.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QAT or FTHF?

QAT is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FTHF.

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

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.76%, compared with 3.25% for FTHF.

What is the main difference between QAT and FTHF?

QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while FTHF tracks Emerging Markets Human Flourishing Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QAT and 0.75% for FTHF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTHF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs -0.41), 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.