AESR vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AESR (Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AESR returned 15.28%/yr vs 22.22%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AESR charges 1.46%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

AESR vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AESR achieves a 20.98% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.

AESR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 7.94%
• YTD: 20.98%
• 6M: 21.17%
• 1Y: 39.18%
• 3Y*: 26.82%
• 5Y*: 15.28%
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 11.94%
• YTD: 40.18%
• 6M: 38.57%
• 1Y: 75.07%
• 3Y*: 37.62%
• 5Y*: 22.22%
• 10Y*: —

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

AESR vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
AESR Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF	20.98%	20.34%	25.37%	21.03%	-17.52%	25.26%	28.40%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	78.48%

Correlation

The correlation between AESR and IQM is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020	0.85

The correlation between AESR and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

AESR vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AESR	IQM
Technology	33.8%	65.9%
Communication Services	26.0%	2.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.8%	4.1%
Industrials	10.6%	19.9%
Financial Services	7.0%	-
Basic Materials	2.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	-
Energy	2.1%	2.7%
Healthcare	2.0%	1.1%
Utilities	0.3%	3.3%
Real Estate	0.3%	-

Return for Risk

AESR vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

AESR

AESR Risk / Return Rank: 75
AESR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
AESR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
AESR Omega Ratio Rank: 70
AESR Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
AESR Martin Ratio Rank: 83

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 78
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

AESR vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). 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.

	AESR	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.67	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.11	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.43	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	5.13	-1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.87	16.79	+0.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AESR vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AESR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AESR and IQM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AESR	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.67	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	0.77	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.96	-0.13

Drawdowns

AESR vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AESR drawdown since its inception was -31.06%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AESR and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	AESR	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.06%	-44.91%	+13.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.82%	-14.71%	+4.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.85%	-30.42%	+10.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.04%	-44.91%	+19.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-0.37%	+0.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.02%	-12.25%	+6.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.33%	4.49%	-2.16%

Volatility

AESR vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) is 5.52%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that AESR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AESR	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.52%	9.20%	-3.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.73%	22.92%	-10.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.39%	28.27%	-11.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.83%	28.91%	-11.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.44%	30.72%	-10.28%

AESR vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

AESR has a 1.46% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

AESR vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

AESR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.03%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AESR Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF	19.03%	23.02%	0.17%	0.33%	0.73%	6.59%	1.06%	0.33%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%	0.01%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AESR and IQM in my portfolio?

AESR and IQM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AESR or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to AESR (5.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AESR dropped -31.06% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, AESR or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 15.28% for AESR. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, AESR has been the lower-risk option at 5.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AESR or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 15.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AESR or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.46% for AESR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AESR or IQM?

AESR has the higher dividend yield at 19.03%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between AESR and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 1.46% for AESR and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.40), 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.