EWM ranks 4th and QAT 20th of 21 funds in the Emerging Markets Single Country Category.
EWM vs QAT
EWM −0.10pt a year
0.50%0.60%
EWM 9.7×the volume
206K21.2K
QAT +0.8pt
+2.9%+3.7%
EWM vs QAT Performance
+29.3%+4.8%
- EWM 0.50%, better
- QAT 0.60%
- EWM $253M
- QAT $63M
- EWM +7.7%, better
- QAT −3.4%
- EWM 3.66%
- QAT 4.74%, better
- EWM 25
- QAT 35
- EWM 206K sh, better
- QAT 21.2K sh
- EWM $26.98
- QAT $17.69
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | EWM | QAT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A88Higher | F24 |
| Mission | D34Higher | F22 |
| Risk | A78Higher | C52 |
| Tradability | B57Higher | D38 |
| Holdings | C41Higher | D32 |
| Durability | B58Higher | C45 |
Rank among Emerging Markets Single Country funds
Same Category. EWM and QAT are both graded against the same 21 Emerging Markets Single Country funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
EWMB
QATD
In short
EWM Malaysia in one ticker, running since 1996. EWM tracks the MSCI Malaysia index, a cap-weighted slice of Kuala Lumpur's largest listed companies, and charges less than the typical single-country emerging markets fund.
QAT One ticker, one country. QAT tracks the MSCI All Qatar Capped Index with a tight basket of Qatari stocks, giving US investors direct access to a small Gulf market that barely registers inside a broad emerging markets fund.
Stated mandate
EWM The fund seeks to track an index composed of Malaysian equities.
QAT The fund seeks to track an index composed of Qatar equities, providing targeted exposure to companies in Qatar and a way to express a single-country view.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
EWM vs QAT Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
EWM vs QAT Cost
Overpaying QAT vs EWM
$1,838
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
EWM 0.50%
$9,979
QAT 0.60%
$11,817
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | EWM | QAT | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $900 | $1,076 | $176 |
| 20 | $3,460 | $4,116 | $656 |
| 30 | $9,979 | $11,817 | $1,838 |
- 0.50%EWM, cheaper
- 0.60%QAT
- Middle half of Emerging Markets Single Country funds
- Median 0.59%
EWM 3rd cheapest of 21 funds
QAT 17th cheapest of 21 funds
EWM vs QAT Dividends
- EWM 3.66%
- QAT 4.74%, better
- EWM $1.00
- QAT $0.85
- EWM $0.57
- QAT $0.62
- EWM Jun 15, 2026
- QAT Jun 15, 2026
- EWM Jun 18, 2026
- QAT Jun 22, 2026
- EWM Twice a year
- QAT Twice a year
Distribution history
EWM vs QAT Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- EWM
- QAT
Risk facts
- Volatility
- EWM 13.0%QAT 11.7%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- EWM 0.68, betterQAT 0.04
- Worst fall
- EWM −22.2%, betterQAT −33.2%
- Market sensitivity
- EWM 0.46QAT 0.51
EWM and QAT in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.50% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.60% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.60% · 0.19%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.50% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.60% · 0.59%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
