AIEQ vs. ILCB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AIEQ (AI Powered Equity ETF) and ILCB (iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. AIEQ is actively managed, while ILCB is passively managed. Over the past year, AIEQ returned 22.77% vs 28.03% for ILCB. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AIEQ charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for ILCB.

Performance

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) and iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF (ILCB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AIEQ achieves a 10.58% return, which is significantly lower than ILCB's 11.12% return.

AIEQ

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 5.24%
• YTD: 10.58%
• 6M: 11.05%
• 1Y: 22.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILCB

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 5.29%
• YTD: 11.12%
• 6M: 11.10%
• 1Y: 28.03%
• 3Y*: 22.69%
• 5Y*: 13.45%
• 10Y*: 15.00%

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

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AIEQ AI Powered Equity ETF	10.58%	13.96%	14.21%
ILCB iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF	11.12%	17.70%	20.95%

Correlation

The correlation between AIEQ and ILCB is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024	0.91

The correlation between AIEQ and ILCB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AIEQ	ILCB
Technology	35.7%	35.5%
Financial Services	13.1%	11.7%
Communication Services	12.3%	11.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.5%	10.1%
Industrials	8.3%	8.6%
Healthcare	7.1%	8.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.7%	4.8%
Energy	2.7%	3.5%
Basic Materials	2.4%	1.8%
Real Estate	1.7%	1.8%
Utilities	0.6%	2.3%

Return for Risk

AIEQ vs. ILCB — Risk / Return Rank

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

AIEQ

AIEQ Risk / Return Rank: 53
AIEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
AIEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
AIEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 53
AIEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
AIEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 55

ILCB

ILCB Risk / Return Rank: 69
ILCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
ILCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
ILCB Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ILCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
ILCB Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) and iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF (ILCB). 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.

	AIEQ	ILCB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.35	-0.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.55	3.20	-0.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.42	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.51	3.10	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.72	14.24	-4.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AIEQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the ILCB Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AIEQ and ILCB, 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

	AIEQ	ILCB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.86	2.35	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.79	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.83	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.87	0.64	+0.23

Drawdowns

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AIEQ drawdown since its inception was -24.19%, smaller than the maximum ILCB drawdown of -51.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIEQ and ILCB.

Drawdown Indicators

	AIEQ	ILCB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.19%	-51.53%	+27.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.11%	-9.09%	-0.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.47%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-0.67%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.31%	-6.24%	+2.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	1.97%	+0.38%

Volatility

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Volatility Comparison

AI Powered Equity ETF (AIEQ) has a higher volatility of 3.14% compared to iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF (ILCB) at 2.88%. This indicates that AIEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AIEQ	ILCB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.14%	2.88%	+0.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.37%	9.10%	+0.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.34%	12.02%	+0.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.48%	17.13%	+2.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.48%	18.16%	+1.32%

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Expense Ratio Comparison

AIEQ has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCB's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

AIEQ vs. ILCB - Dividend Comparison

AIEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than ILCB's 0.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AIEQ AI Powered Equity ETF	0.39%	0.43%	0.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ILCB iShares Morningstar U.S. Equity ETF	0.97%	1.11%	1.19%	1.43%	1.65%	1.16%	1.26%	2.25%	2.17%	1.81%	1.97%	2.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AIEQ and ILCB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, AIEQ and ILCB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, AIEQ or ILCB?

AIEQ has higher volatility (3.14%) compared to ILCB (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIEQ dropped -24.19% vs ILCB's -51.53%.

Which ETF is better, AIEQ or ILCB?

On 1-year performance, ILCB leads with 28.03% vs 22.77% for AIEQ. On fees, ILCB is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, ILCB has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AIEQ or ILCB?

Over the 1-year period, ILCB has performed better with a 28.03% return vs 22.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AIEQ or ILCB?

ILCB is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for AIEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AIEQ or ILCB?

ILCB has the higher dividend yield at 0.97%, compared with 0.39% for AIEQ.

What is the main difference between AIEQ and ILCB?

They also come from different issuers: ETFMG and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for AIEQ and 0.03% for ILCB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.86), 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.