ALTL vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ALTL (Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ALTL is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, ALTL returned 5.11%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for IQM. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ALTL charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

ALTL vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF (ALTL) 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, ALTL achieves a 15.79% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 35.15% return.

ALTL

• 1D: -3.95%
• 1M: 6.17%
• YTD: 15.79%
• 6M: 15.53%
• 1Y: 39.21%
• 3Y*: 12.68%
• 5Y*: 5.11%
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: -6.20%
• 1M: 3.59%
• YTD: 35.15%
• 6M: 31.71%
• 1Y: 66.07%
• 3Y*: 35.52%
• 5Y*: 20.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

ALTL vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ALTL Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF	15.79%	16.61%	12.30%	-15.85%	-10.67%	45.30%	35.38%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	35.15%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	57.40%

Correlation

The correlation between ALTL and IQM is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.50
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2020	0.55

The correlation between ALTL and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

ALTL vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ALTL	IQM
Technology	42.5%	68.4%
Financial Services	16.7%	-
Real Estate	14.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.4%	2.9%
Industrials	9.7%	17.1%
Basic Materials	6.1%	-
Utilities	4.0%	3.2%
Communication Services	3.7%	2.3%
Healthcare	1.9%	1.0%
Energy	1.8%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	1.0%	-

Return for Risk

ALTL vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

ALTL

ALTL Risk / Return Rank: 68
ALTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
ALTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ALTL Omega Ratio Rank: 63
ALTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ALTL Martin Ratio Rank: 77

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 70
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 61
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

ALTL vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF (ALTL) 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.

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.

	ALTL	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.92	2.11	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	2.52	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.35	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	4.52	-0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.55	14.13	-0.57

ALTL vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ALTL Sharpe Ratio is 1.92, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ALTL 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.

Drawdowns

ALTL vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ALTL drawdown since its inception was -31.91%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ALTL and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	ALTL	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.91%	-44.91%	+13.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.79%	-14.71%	+4.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.21%	-30.42%	+9.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.91%	-44.91%	+13.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.95%	-6.20%	+2.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.50%	-12.18%	+0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	4.69%	-1.79%

Volatility

ALTL vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF (ALTL) is 11.62%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 15.34%. This indicates that ALTL 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

	ALTL	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.62%	15.34%	-3.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.20%	26.16%	-10.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.53%	31.47%	-10.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.97%	29.56%	-10.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.47%	31.10%	-10.63%

ALTL vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

ALTL has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

ALTL vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

ALTL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
ALTL Pacer Lunt Large Cap Alternator ETF	0.88%	0.95%	1.56%	1.28%	1.23%	1.06%	0.75%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ALTL and IQM in my portfolio?

ALTL and IQM have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ALTL or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (15.34%) compared to ALTL (11.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ALTL dropped -31.91% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, ALTL or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 20.13% vs 5.11% for ALTL. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ALTL has been the lower-risk option at 11.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ALTL or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 20.13% return vs 5.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ALTL or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for ALTL.

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

ALTL has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between ALTL and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for ALTL and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.92), 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.