CCOR vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CCOR (Core Alternative ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, CCOR returned -1.97%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for IQM. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CCOR charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

CCOR vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Core Alternative ETF (CCOR) 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, CCOR achieves a -2.72% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 35.15% return.

CCOR

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: -2.72%
• 6M: -2.94%
• 1Y: -3.86%
• 3Y*: -1.69%
• 5Y*: -1.97%
• 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)

CCOR vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	-2.72%	3.52%	-5.70%	-11.92%	2.51%	9.90%	5.63%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	35.15%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	76.92%

Correlation

The correlation between CCOR and IQM is -0.24, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.23
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2020	0.03

The correlation between CCOR and IQM shifts across timeframes, from -0.24 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CCOR vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CCOR	IQM
Financial Services	18.2%	-
Technology	15.6%	68.4%
Healthcare	11.2%	1.0%
Industrials	9.1%	17.1%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	2.9%
Communication Services	8.3%	2.3%
Energy	7.9%	2.3%
Consumer Defensive	7.0%	-
Utilities	6.2%	3.2%
Basic Materials	4.9%	-
Real Estate	2.8%	-

Return for Risk

CCOR vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCOR

CCOR Risk / Return Rank: 5
CCOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CCOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
CCOR Omega Ratio Rank: 4
CCOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
CCOR Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

CCOR vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Core Alternative ETF (CCOR) 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.

	CCOR	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.51	2.11	-2.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.66	2.52	-3.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.92	1.35	-0.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.44	4.52	-4.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.94	14.13	-15.07

CCOR vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCOR Sharpe Ratio is -0.51, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCOR 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

CCOR vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCOR drawdown since its inception was -22.99%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCOR and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCOR	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.99%	-44.91%	+21.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.79%	-14.71%	+5.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.31%	-30.42%	+18.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.99%	-44.91%	+21.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.21%	-6.20%	-13.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.35%	-12.18%	+4.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.10%	4.69%	-0.59%

Volatility

CCOR vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Core Alternative ETF (CCOR) is 3.51%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 15.34%. This indicates that CCOR 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

	CCOR	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.51%	15.34%	-11.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.62%	26.16%	-20.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.56%	31.47%	-23.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.15%	29.56%	-18.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.77%	31.10%	-20.33%

CCOR vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCOR has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCOR vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

CCOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	1.02%	1.07%	1.18%	1.21%	1.11%	1.02%	1.50%	0.73%	1.53%	0.89%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCOR and IQM in my portfolio?

CCOR and IQM have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCOR or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (15.34%) compared to CCOR (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCOR dropped -22.99% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, CCOR or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 20.13% vs -1.97% for CCOR. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CCOR has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CCOR or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 20.13% return vs -1.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CCOR or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for CCOR.

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

CCOR has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between CCOR and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Core Alternative Capital and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for CCOR and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs -0.51), 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.