XCEM vs. QAT

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and QAT (iShares MSCI Qatar ETF) are both Emerging Markets Equities funds - XCEM tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index while QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCEM returned 11.28%/yr vs 3.26%/yr for QAT. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for QAT.

Performance

XCEM vs. QAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 29.80% return, which is significantly higher than QAT's -2.07% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has outperformed QAT with an annualized return of 11.28%, while QAT has yielded a comparatively lower 3.26% annualized return.

XCEM

• 1D: 1.49%
• 1M: -3.73%
• 6M: 24.35%
• YTD: 29.80%
• 1Y: 50.50%
• 3Y*: 22.27%
• 5Y*: 10.85%
• 10Y*: 11.28%

QAT

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -0.92%
• 6M: -6.50%
• YTD: -2.07%
• 1Y: -0.32%
• 3Y*: 4.23%
• 5Y*: 3.02%
• 10Y*: 3.26%

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

XCEM vs. QAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	29.80%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	-2.07%	8.81%	5.20%	2.72%	-7.23%	14.42%	6.94%	-0.44%	20.03%	-11.66%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and QAT is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
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	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 2, 2015	0.32

XCEM vs. QAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCEM	QAT
Technology	49.5%	1.0%
Financial Services	17.6%	55.5%
Industrials	9.3%	8.4%
Basic Materials	5.3%	12.6%
Consumer Cyclical	4.8%	0.7%
Energy	3.0%	7.6%
Communication Services	3.0%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	0.6%
Healthcare	2.3%	0.8%
Utilities	1.7%	2.5%
Real Estate	1.3%	4.0%

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. QAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 79
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 81
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QAT

QAT Risk / Return Rank: 9
QAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
QAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9
QAT Omega Ratio Rank: 8
QAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
QAT Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

XCEM vs. QAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT). 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.

	XCEM	QAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	-0.02	+2.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	0.06	+2.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.01	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.51	-0.03	+3.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.28	-0.05	+12.33

XCEM vs. QAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is higher than the QAT Sharpe Ratio of -0.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and QAT, 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

XCEM vs. QAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, smaller than the maximum QAT drawdown of -45.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and QAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCEM	QAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.24%	-45.21%	+3.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.46%	-10.60%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.92%	-17.41%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.57%	-33.17%	+3.60%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.24%	-34.04%	-7.20%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.41%	-14.25%	+4.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.56%	-19.12%	+10.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	6.09%	-1.97%

Volatility

XCEM vs. QAT - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 11.62% compared to iShares MSCI Qatar ETF (QAT) at 4.38%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCEM	QAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.62%	4.38%	+7.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.61%	11.17%	+12.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.20%	13.37%	+11.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.85%	15.08%	+3.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.96%	17.52%	+2.44%

XCEM vs. QAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is lower than QAT's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCEM vs. QAT - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than QAT's 4.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QAT iShares MSCI Qatar ETF	4.78%	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	2.51%	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

Can I hold both XCEM and QAT in my portfolio?

XCEM and QAT have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XCEM or QAT?

XCEM has higher volatility (11.62%) compared to QAT (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs QAT's -45.21%.

Which ETF is better, XCEM or QAT?

On 10-year performance, XCEM leads with 11.28% vs 3.26% for QAT. On fees, XCEM is cheaper at 0.16% per year. On volatility, QAT has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCEM or QAT?

Over the 10-year period, XCEM has performed better with a 11.28% return vs 3.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCEM or QAT?

XCEM is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for QAT.

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

QAT has the higher dividend yield at 4.78%, compared with 2.51% for XCEM.

What is the main difference between XCEM and QAT?

XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while QAT tracks MSCI All Qatar Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.59% for QAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 vs -0.02), 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.