QAT vs. SPEM
QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) and SPEM (SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index while SPEM tracks the S&P Emerging Markets BMI. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QAT returned 4.34%/yr vs 9.61%/yr for SPEM. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QAT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.11%/yr for SPEM.
Performance
QAT vs. SPEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QAT achieves a -0.05% return, which is significantly lower than SPEM's 14.06% return. Over the past 10 years, QAT has underperformed SPEM with an annualized return of 4.34%, while SPEM has yielded a comparatively higher 9.61% annualized return.
QAT
- 1D
- -1.37%
- 1M
- 0.05%
- YTD
- -0.05%
- 6M
- 1.39%
- 1Y
- 3.73%
- 3Y*
- 4.09%
- 5Y*
- 3.48%
- 10Y*
- 4.34%
SPEM
- 1D
- 1.23%
- 1M
- 4.16%
- YTD
- 14.06%
- 6M
- 15.69%
- 1Y
- 33.51%
- 3Y*
- 19.29%
- 5Y*
- 6.21%
- 10Y*
- 9.61%
QAT vs. SPEM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF | -0.05% | 8.81% | 5.20% | 2.72% | -7.23% | 14.42% | 6.94% | -0.44% | 20.03% | -11.66% |
SPEM SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF | 14.06% | 25.63% | 11.40% | 10.51% | -17.90% | 1.51% | 14.55% | 19.69% | -13.26% | 34.82% |
Correlation
The correlation between QAT and SPEM is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2014 | 0.34 |
QAT vs. SPEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QAT
SPEM
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Real Estate
Energy
Utilities
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Financial Services
QAT
SPEM
Industrials
QAT
SPEM
Basic Materials
QAT
SPEM
Communication Services
QAT
SPEM
Real Estate
QAT
SPEM
Energy
QAT
SPEM
Utilities
QAT
SPEM
Healthcare
QAT
SPEM
Consumer Cyclical
QAT
SPEM
Consumer Defensive
QAT
SPEM
Technology
QAT
SPEM
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
QAT vs. SPEM — Risk / Return Rank
QAT
SPEM
QAT vs. SPEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF (SPEM). 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.
| QAT | SPEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.28 | 2.12 | -1.84 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.48 | 2.91 | -2.43 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.39 | -0.33 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 3.03 | -2.66 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.73 | 11.13 | -10.40 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QAT | SPEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 | 2.12 | -1.84 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | 0.36 | -0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 | 0.51 | -0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.07 | 0.24 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
QAT vs. SPEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QAT drawdown since its inception was -45.21%, smaller than the maximum SPEM drawdown of -64.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QAT and SPEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QAT | SPEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.21% | -64.41% | +19.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.60% | -11.36% | +0.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.41% | -17.62% | +0.21% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.17% | -31.88% | -1.29% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.04% | -36.06% | +2.02% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.48% | 0.00% | -12.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.18% | -14.75% | -4.43% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.52% | 3.10% | +2.42% |
Volatility
QAT vs. SPEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) is 5.05%, while SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF (SPEM) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that QAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SPEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QAT | SPEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.05% | 5.50% | -0.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.50% | 13.20% | -2.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.36% | 15.86% | -2.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.01% | 17.13% | -2.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.56% | 18.80% | -1.24% |
QAT vs. SPEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
QAT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than SPEM's 0.11% expense ratio.
Dividends
QAT vs. SPEM - Dividend Comparison
QAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, more than SPEM's 2.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF | 3.51% | 3.51% | 5.90% | 3.92% | 4.78% | 2.33% | 2.63% | 3.57% | 4.63% | 4.10% | 3.51% | 4.49% |
SPEM SPDR Portfolio Emerging Markets ETF | 2.43% | 2.77% | 2.78% | 2.80% | 3.38% | 3.14% | 1.92% | 2.94% | 2.34% | 1.12% | 1.51% | 2.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QAT and SPEM have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SPEM has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to QAT (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QAT dropped -45.21% vs SPEM's -64.41%.
On 10-year performance, SPEM leads with 9.61% vs 4.34% for QAT. On fees, SPEM is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 5.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SPEM has performed better with a 9.61% return vs 4.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SPEM is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.
QAT has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 2.43% for SPEM.
QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while SPEM tracks S&P Emerging Markets BMI. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QAT and 0.11% for SPEM.
SPEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 0.28), 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.
Find the right allocation for QAT and SPEM
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