BAI vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BAI (iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAI is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by iShares, while IQM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAI returned 97.95% vs 75.07% for IQM. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAI charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

BAI vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) 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, BAI achieves a 55.29% return, which is significantly higher than IQM's 40.18% return.

BAI

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 18.14%
• YTD: 55.29%
• 6M: 51.89%
• 1Y: 97.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

BAI vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	55.29%	25.22%	8.06%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	4.94%

Correlation

The correlation between BAI and IQM is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2024	0.92

The correlation between BAI and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAI vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAI	IQM
Technology	83.2%	65.9%
Communication Services	6.8%	2.1%
Industrials	6.7%	19.9%
Consumer Cyclical	2.6%	4.1%
Healthcare	0.7%	1.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	2.7%
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	3.3%

Return for Risk

BAI vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAI

BAI Risk / Return Rank: 82
BAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
BAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BAI Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BAI Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

BAI vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) 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.

	BAI	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.04	2.67	+0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	3.11	+0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.43	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.07	5.13	+0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.57	16.79	-0.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BAI vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAI Sharpe Ratio is 3.04, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAI 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

	BAI	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.04	2.67	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.77	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.69	0.96	+0.72

Drawdowns

BAI vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAI drawdown since its inception was -34.09%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAI and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAI	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.09%	-44.91%	+10.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.22%	-14.71%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.42%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.37%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.93%	-12.25%	+5.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.93%	4.49%	+1.44%

Volatility

BAI vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) has a higher volatility of 11.32% compared to Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) at 9.20%. This indicates that BAI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAI	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.32%	9.20%	+2.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.16%	22.92%	+3.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	32.43%	28.27%	+4.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.06%	28.91%	+6.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.06%	30.72%	+4.34%

BAI vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAI has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAI vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

BAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	1.16%	1.80%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 BAI and IQM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, BAI and IQM 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, BAI or IQM?

BAI has higher volatility (11.32%) compared to IQM (9.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAI dropped -34.09% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, BAI or IQM?

On 1-year performance, BAI leads with 97.95% vs 75.07% for IQM. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, IQM has been the lower-risk option at 9.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAI or IQM?

Over the 1-year period, BAI has performed better with a 97.95% return vs 75.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAI or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BAI.

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

BAI has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between BAI and IQM?

BAI is categorized as Technology Equities, while IQM is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for BAI and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.04 vs 2.67), 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.