QAT vs. XCEM
QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) and XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index while XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QAT returned 4.34%/yr vs 13.13%/yr for XCEM. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QAT charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for XCEM.
Performance
QAT vs. XCEM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QAT achieves a -0.05% return, which is significantly lower than XCEM's 40.07% return. Over the past 10 years, QAT has underperformed XCEM with an annualized return of 4.34%, while XCEM has yielded a comparatively higher 13.13% 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%
XCEM
- 1D
- 0.56%
- 1M
- 13.69%
- YTD
- 40.07%
- 6M
- 46.60%
- 1Y
- 73.68%
- 3Y*
- 26.90%
- 5Y*
- 12.48%
- 10Y*
- 13.13%
QAT vs. XCEM - 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% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 40.07% | 34.05% | 0.42% | 19.96% | -17.59% | 7.87% | 9.47% | 19.74% | -11.75% | 34.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between QAT and XCEM 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 | 0.36 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 3, 2015 | 0.32 |
QAT vs. XCEM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QAT
XCEM
Financial Services
Industrials
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Real Estate
Energy
Utilities
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Financial Services
QAT
XCEM
Industrials
QAT
XCEM
Basic Materials
QAT
XCEM
Communication Services
QAT
XCEM
Real Estate
QAT
XCEM
Energy
QAT
XCEM
Utilities
QAT
XCEM
Healthcare
QAT
XCEM
Consumer Cyclical
QAT
XCEM
Consumer Defensive
QAT
XCEM
Technology
QAT
XCEM
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. XCEM — Risk / Return Rank
QAT
XCEM
QAT vs. XCEM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM). 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 | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.28 | 3.55 | -3.27 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.48 | 4.41 | -3.93 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 1.63 | -0.57 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 5.17 | -4.79 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.73 | 20.94 | -20.22 |
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 | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 | 3.55 | -3.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | 0.71 | -0.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.25 | 0.67 | -0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.07 | 0.64 | -0.57 |
Drawdowns
QAT vs. XCEM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QAT drawdown since its inception was -45.21%, which is greater than XCEM's maximum drawdown of -41.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QAT and XCEM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QAT | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.21% | -41.24% | -3.97% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.60% | -14.46% | +3.86% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.41% | -18.92% | +1.51% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.17% | -29.67% | -3.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -34.04% | -41.24% | +7.20% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -12.48% | 0.00% | -12.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.18% | -8.60% | -10.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.52% | 3.57% | +1.95% |
Volatility
QAT vs. XCEM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) is 5.05%, while Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a volatility of 9.25%. This indicates that QAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XCEM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QAT | XCEM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.05% | 9.25% | -4.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.50% | 18.68% | -8.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.36% | 20.84% | -7.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.01% | 17.74% | -2.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.56% | 19.72% | -2.16% |
QAT vs. XCEM - Expense Ratio Comparison
QAT has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than XCEM's 0.16% expense ratio.
Dividends
QAT vs. XCEM - Dividend Comparison
QAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.51%, more than XCEM's 2.32% 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% |
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF | 2.32% | 3.25% | 2.76% | 1.22% | 2.42% | 1.94% | 1.63% | 2.11% | 2.70% | 9.56% | 1.24% | 2.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QAT and XCEM 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.
XCEM has higher volatility (9.25%) compared to QAT (5.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QAT dropped -45.21% vs XCEM's -41.24%.
On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 13.13% vs 4.34% for QAT. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% 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, XCEM has performed better with a 13.13% return vs 4.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.
QAT has the higher dividend yield at 3.51%, compared with 2.32% for XCEM.
QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index, while XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Ameriprise Financial. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for QAT and 0.16% for XCEM.
XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.55 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 XCEM
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