EWG | QAT | EWG / QAT | |
Gain YTD | 34.859 | 6.042 | 577% |
Net Assets | 2.87B | 78.5M | 3,650% |
Total Expense Ratio | 0.50 | 0.60 | 83% |
Turnover | 3.00 | 27.00 | 11% |
Yield | 1.60 | 3.87 | 41% |
Fund Existence | 29 years | 11 years | - |
EWG | QAT | |
---|---|---|
RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 5 days ago90% |
Stochastic ODDS (%) | 5 days ago81% | 5 days ago77% |
Momentum ODDS (%) | 5 days ago80% | 5 days ago78% |
MACD ODDS (%) | 5 days ago80% | 5 days ago70% |
TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 5 days ago81% | 5 days ago77% |
TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 5 days ago79% | 5 days ago75% |
Advances ODDS (%) | 5 days ago82% | 8 days ago77% |
Declines ODDS (%) | 20 days ago82% | 6 days ago72% |
BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 5 days ago82% | 5 days ago79% |
Aroon ODDS (%) | 5 days ago83% | 5 days ago76% |
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, EWG has been loosely correlated with SAP. These tickers have moved in lockstep 66% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if EWG jumps, then SAP could also see price increases.
A.I.dvisor tells us that QAT and MARK have been poorly correlated (+1% of the time) for the last year. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is low statistical probability that QAT and MARK's prices will move in lockstep.
Ticker / NAME | Correlation To QAT | 1D Price Change % | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
QAT | 100% | N/A | ||
MARK - QAT | 1% Poorly correlated | -5.43% |