QAT vs. RNEM

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) and RNEM (First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index while RNEM tracks the Nasdaq Riskalyze Emerging Markets Equity Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, QAT returned 2.76%/yr vs 5.15%/yr for RNEM. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QAT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RNEM.

Performance

QAT vs. RNEM - 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 Equity Select ETF (RNEM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QAT achieves a -3.28% return, which is significantly lower than RNEM's 1.18% return.

QAT

• 1D: -1.07%
• 1M: -4.88%
• 6M: -6.30%
• YTD: -3.28%
• 1Y: -1.91%
• 3Y*: 3.89%
• 5Y*: 2.76%
• 10Y*: 3.20%

RNEM

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: -0.16%
• 6M: -0.69%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 1Y: 3.25%
• 3Y*: 5.95%
• 5Y*: 5.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

QAT vs. RNEM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	-3.28%	8.81%	5.20%	2.72%	-7.23%	14.42%	6.94%	-0.44%	20.03%	-2.53%
RNEM First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF	1.18%	15.58%	-1.47%	23.43%	-8.75%	6.16%	-8.16%	12.76%	-9.34%	11.97%

Correlation

The correlation between QAT and RNEM is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2017	0.29

QAT vs. RNEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QAT	RNEM
Financial Services	55.5%	35.0%
Basic Materials	12.6%	14.2%
Industrials	8.4%	3.9%
Energy	7.6%	7.0%
Communication Services	6.3%	8.7%
Real Estate	4.0%	0.8%
Utilities	2.5%	3.5%
Technology	1.0%	6.4%
Healthcare	0.8%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	9.9%
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	6.0%

Return for Risk

QAT vs. RNEM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QAT

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

RNEM

RNEM Risk / Return Rank: 13
RNEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
RNEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
RNEM Omega Ratio Rank: 12
RNEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
RNEM Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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. RNEM - 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 Equity Select ETF (RNEM). 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	RNEM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.14	0.26	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.11	0.46	-0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.05	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.18	0.30	-0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.31	0.81	-1.12

QAT vs. RNEM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.14, which is lower than the RNEM Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QAT and RNEM, 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. RNEM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QAT drawdown since its inception was -45.21%, which is greater than RNEM's maximum drawdown of -38.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QAT and RNEM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QAT	RNEM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.21%	-38.38%	-6.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.60%	-10.71%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.41%	-13.09%	-4.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.17%	-21.41%	-11.76%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.04%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.31%	-4.94%	-10.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.11%	-9.25%	-9.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.15%	4.02%	+2.13%

Volatility

QAT vs. RNEM - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF (RNEM) have volatilities of 3.17% and 3.16%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QAT	RNEM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.17%	3.16%	+0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.12%	10.90%	+0.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.41%	12.50%	+0.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.09%	14.48%	+0.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.51%	17.17%	+0.34%

QAT vs. RNEM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QAT vs. RNEM - Dividend Comparison

QAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.84%, more than RNEM's 2.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	4.84%	3.51%	5.90%	3.92%	4.78%	2.33%	2.63%	3.57%	4.63%	4.10%	3.51%	4.49%
RNEM First Trust Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF	2.35%	2.75%	3.45%	1.63%	2.99%	3.20%	3.01%	2.85%	2.85%	2.28%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QAT and RNEM in my portfolio?

QAT and RNEM have a correlation of 0.38, 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 RNEM?

QAT has higher volatility (3.17%) compared to RNEM (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QAT dropped -45.21% vs RNEM's -38.38%.

Which ETF is better, QAT or RNEM?

On 5-year performance, RNEM leads with 5.15% vs 2.76% for QAT. On fees, QAT is cheaper at 0.59% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QAT or RNEM?

Over the 5-year period, RNEM has performed better with a 5.15% return vs 2.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QAT or RNEM?

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

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

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.84%, compared with 2.35% for RNEM.

What is the main difference between QAT and RNEM?

QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while RNEM tracks Nasdaq Riskalyze Emerging Markets Equity Select Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QAT and 0.75% for RNEM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RNEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.26 vs -0.14), 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.