CTEX vs. IQM
CTEX (ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CTEX is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P Kensho Cleantech Index, while IQM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. CTEX is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CTEX returned 16.51%/yr vs 37.62%/yr for IQM. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CTEX charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.
Performance
CTEX vs. IQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CTEX having a 39.97% return and IQM slightly higher at 40.18%.
CTEX
- 1D
- -4.08%
- 1M
- 24.08%
- YTD
- 39.97%
- 6M
- 41.91%
- 1Y
- 154.30%
- 3Y*
- 16.51%
- 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*
- —
CTEX vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF | 39.97% | 67.74% | -20.38% | -10.25% | -20.38% | -6.68% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 40.18% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 41.06% | -33.36% | 12.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between CTEX and IQM is 0.68, 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 | 0.68 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021 | 0.65 |
The correlation between CTEX and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
CTEX vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CTEX
IQM
Industrials
Technology
Utilities
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
CTEX
IQM
Technology
CTEX
IQM
Utilities
CTEX
IQM
Energy
CTEX
IQM
Consumer Cyclical
CTEX
IQM
Basic Materials
CTEX
-
IQM
-
Communication Services
CTEX
-
IQM
Consumer Defensive
CTEX
-
IQM
-
Financial Services
CTEX
-
IQM
-
Healthcare
CTEX
-
IQM
Real Estate
CTEX
-
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
CTEX vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank
CTEX
IQM
CTEX vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) 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.
| CTEX | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.43 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.18 | 5.13 | +2.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.95 | 16.79 | +3.16 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CTEX | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.68 | 2.67 | +1.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.11 | 0.96 | -0.85 |
Drawdowns
CTEX vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CTEX drawdown since its inception was -70.31%, which is greater than IQM's maximum drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CTEX and IQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CTEX | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.31% | -44.91% | -25.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.62% | -14.71% | -6.91% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -56.83% | -30.42% | -26.41% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -44.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.08% | -0.37% | -3.71% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.94% | -12.25% | -29.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.77% | 4.49% | +3.28% |
Volatility
CTEX vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison
ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF (CTEX) has a higher volatility of 15.79% compared to Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) at 9.20%. This indicates that CTEX'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CTEX | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.79% | 9.20% | +6.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.89% | 22.92% | +6.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 42.32% | 28.27% | +14.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.30% | 28.91% | +14.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.30% | 30.72% | +12.58% |
CTEX vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CTEX has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CTEX vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison
CTEX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CTEX ProShares S&P Kensho Cleantech ETF | 1.50% | 2.17% | 0.57% | 0.12% | 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
CTEX and IQM have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CTEX has higher volatility (15.79%) compared to IQM (9.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CTEX dropped -70.31% vs IQM's -44.91%.
On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 37.62% vs 16.51% for CTEX. 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.
Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 37.62% return vs 16.51%. 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 0.58% for CTEX.
CTEX has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.
CTEX is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while IQM is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for CTEX and 0.50% for IQM.
CTEX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.68 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.
Find the right allocation for CTEX 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