CAML vs. IQM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

CAML (Congress Large Cap Growth ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CAML returned 6.37% vs 32.29% for IQM. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CAML charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

CAML vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) 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, CAML achieves a 2.44% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 17.24% return.

CAML

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: -1.91%
• 6M: 2.92%
• YTD: 2.44%
• 1Y: 6.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.40%

IQM

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: -8.20%
• 6M: 11.29%
• YTD: 17.24%
• 1Y: 32.29%
• 3Y*: 27.64%
• 5Y*: 15.91%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.95%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF	$1.01M	$985.32K	$958.87K
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	$879.80K	$730.37K	$921.63K

CAML vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF	2.44%	12.43%	23.24%	10.11%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	17.24%	30.76%	31.03%	11.57%

Correlation

The correlation between CAML and IQM is 0.80, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2023	0.85

The correlation between CAML and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

CAML vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAML	IQM
Technology	44.7%	70.5%
Industrials	13.6%	14.8%
Communication Services	9.0%	1.1%
Financial Services	8.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	2.7%
Healthcare	6.2%	1.0%
Utilities	3.4%	3.5%
Real Estate	2.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	-
Energy	2.3%	3.1%
Basic Materials	2.2%	-

Return for Risk

CAML vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CAML

CAML Risk / Return Rank: 17
CAML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
CAML Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
CAML Omega Ratio Rank: 17
CAML Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
CAML Martin Ratio Rank: 18

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 35
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 35
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CAML vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) 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.

	CAML	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.31	0.83	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.54	1.26	-0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.16	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.33	1.18	-0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.05	4.54	-3.49

CAML vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAML Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 0.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAML 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

CAML vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAML drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAML and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAML	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-44.91%	+23.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.86%	-25.28%	+10.42%
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	-4.03%	-18.62%	+14.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.06%	-12.19%	+9.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.67%	6.58%	-1.91%

Volatility

CAML vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) is 4.91%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 16.22%. This indicates that CAML 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

	CAML	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.91%	16.22%	-11.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.82%	31.20%	-18.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.88%	36.13%	-20.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.82%	30.62%	-12.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.82%	31.69%	-13.87%

CAML vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAML has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAML vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

Neither CAML nor IQM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.06%	0.15%	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 CAML and IQM in my portfolio?

CAML 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, CAML or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (16.22%) compared to CAML (4.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAML dropped -21.06% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, CAML or IQM?

On 1-year performance, IQM leads with 32.29% vs 6.37% for CAML. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CAML has been the lower-risk option at 4.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAML or IQM?

Over the 1-year period, IQM has performed better with a 32.29% return vs 6.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAML or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CAML.

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

CAML and IQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CAML and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Congress and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CAML and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.83 vs 0.31), 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.