CAML vs. IQM
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 15.43% vs 79.61% for IQM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CAML charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.
Performance
CAML vs. IQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CAML achieves a 5.06% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 44.08% return.
CAML
- 1D
- -0.77%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- YTD
- 5.06%
- 6M
- 4.24%
- 1Y
- 15.43%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IQM
- 1D
- 1.35%
- 1M
- 10.43%
- YTD
- 44.08%
- 6M
- 40.98%
- 1Y
- 79.61%
- 3Y*
- 38.44%
- 5Y*
- 21.97%
- 10Y*
- —
CAML vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CAML Congress Large Cap Growth ETF | 5.06% | 12.43% | 23.24% | 10.11% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 44.08% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 11.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between CAML and IQM is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
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
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Technology
CAML
IQM
Industrials
CAML
IQM
Consumer Cyclical
CAML
IQM
Communication Services
CAML
IQM
Financial Services
CAML
IQM
-
Healthcare
CAML
IQM
Utilities
CAML
IQM
Real Estate
CAML
IQM
-
Consumer Defensive
CAML
IQM
-
Energy
CAML
IQM
Basic Materials
CAML
IQM
-
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
CAML vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank
CAML
IQM
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.42 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.04 | 5.44 | -4.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.41 | 17.08 | -13.68 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CAML | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.06% | -44.91% | +23.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.86% | -14.71% | -0.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -30.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -44.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.57% | 0.00% | -1.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.06% | -12.18% | +9.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.54% | 4.68% | -0.14% |
Volatility
CAML vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Congress Large Cap Growth ETF (CAML) is 5.61%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 13.76%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CAML | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 13.76% | -8.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.11% | 25.34% | -13.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.30% | 30.87% | -15.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.85% | 29.43% | -11.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.85% | 31.01% | -13.16% |
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
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.
IQM has higher volatility (13.76%) compared to CAML (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAML dropped -21.06% vs IQM's -44.91%.
On 1-year performance, IQM leads with 79.61% vs 15.43% for CAML. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CAML has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. 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 79.61% return vs 15.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CAML.
CAML and IQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Congress and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CAML and 0.50% for IQM.
IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 1.01), 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.
Find the right allocation for CAML 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