PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BKCG vs. IQM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BKCG vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKCG achieves a 4.02% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.


BKCG

1D
-1.19%
1M
1.33%
YTD
4.02%
6M
4.51%
1Y
13.80%
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)

BKCG vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BKCG and IQM is 0.71, 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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025

0.75

The correlation between BKCG and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKCG vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BKCG
IQM

Technology

37.8%
65.9%

Financial Services

19.5%

-

Communication Services

12.8%
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

11.6%
4.1%

Industrials

9.2%
19.9%

Healthcare

6.2%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

2.9%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Energy

-

2.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

3.3%

Technology

BKCG
37.8%
IQM
65.9%

Financial Services

BKCG
19.5%
IQM

-

Communication Services

BKCG
12.8%
IQM
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

BKCG
11.6%
IQM
4.1%

Industrials

BKCG
9.2%
IQM
19.9%

Healthcare

BKCG
6.2%
IQM
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

BKCG
2.9%
IQM

-

Basic Materials

BKCG

-

IQM

-

Energy

BKCG

-

IQM
2.7%

Real Estate

BKCG

-

IQM

-

Utilities

BKCG

-

IQM
3.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BKCG vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKCG
BKCG Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
BKCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BKCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
BKCG Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
BKCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
BKCG Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
Martin Ratio Rank

IQM
IQM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BKCG vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) 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.


BKCGIQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.43

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.14

5.13

-3.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.65

16.79

-12.14

BKCG vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKCG 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BKCGIQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.05

2.67

-1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.09

0.96

+0.13

Drawdowns

BKCG vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKCG drawdown since its inception was -12.12%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKCG and IQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BKCGIQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.12%

-44.91%

+32.79%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.12%

-14.71%

+2.59%

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

-2.09%

-0.37%

-1.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.97%

-12.25%

+10.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.97%

4.49%

-1.52%

Volatility

BKCG vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) is 3.38%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that BKCG 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BKCGIQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.38%

9.20%

-5.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.37%

22.92%

-12.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.19%

28.27%

-15.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.03%

28.91%

-10.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.03%

30.72%

-12.69%

BKCG vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BKCG and IQM have an expense ratio of 0.50%.


Dividends

BKCG vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

BKCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BKCG
BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF
0.78%0.45%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


BKCG and IQM have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to BKCG (3.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKCG dropped -12.12% vs IQM's -44.91%.

On 1-year performance, IQM leads with 75.07% vs 13.80% for BKCG. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, BKCG has been the lower-risk option at 3.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IQM has performed better with a 75.07% return vs 13.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BKCG and IQM have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

BKCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: BNY Mellon and Franklin Templeton.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.05), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BKCG and IQM

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer