FCTR vs. IQM
FCTR (First Trust Lunt U.S. Factor Rotation ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FCTR is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCTR returned 4.29%/yr vs 22.22%/yr for IQM. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FCTR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.
Performance
FCTR vs. IQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCTR achieves a 15.16% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.
FCTR
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 8.63%
- YTD
- 15.16%
- 6M
- 15.25%
- 1Y
- 23.34%
- 3Y*
- 18.16%
- 5Y*
- 4.29%
- 10Y*
- —
IQM
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 11.94%
- YTD
- 40.18%
- 6M
- 38.57%
- 1Y
- 75.07%
- 3Y*
- 37.62%
- 5Y*
- 22.22%
- 10Y*
- —
FCTR vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCTR First Trust Lunt U.S. Factor Rotation ETF | 15.16% | 8.63% | 19.54% | 0.71% | -20.42% | 21.13% | 41.70% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 40.18% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 41.06% | -33.36% | 25.18% | 78.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCTR and IQM is 0.75, 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 | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020 | 0.79 |
The correlation between FCTR and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.
FCTR vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FCTR
IQM
Technology
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Real Estate
-
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Utilities
Communication Services
Technology
FCTR
IQM
Financial Services
FCTR
IQM
-
Healthcare
FCTR
IQM
Industrials
FCTR
IQM
Consumer Cyclical
FCTR
IQM
Consumer Defensive
FCTR
IQM
-
Real Estate
FCTR
IQM
-
Energy
FCTR
IQM
Basic Materials
FCTR
IQM
-
Utilities
FCTR
IQM
Communication Services
FCTR
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
FCTR vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank
FCTR
IQM
FCTR vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Lunt U.S. Factor Rotation ETF (FCTR) 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.
| FCTR | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.43 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.10 | 5.13 | -3.03 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.66 | 16.79 | -9.12 |
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
| FCTR | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.34 | 2.67 | -1.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 | 0.77 | -0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 0.96 | -0.49 |
Drawdowns
FCTR vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCTR drawdown since its inception was -37.10%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCTR and IQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCTR | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.10% | -44.91% | +7.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.17% | -14.71% | +3.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.63% | -30.42% | +7.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -37.10% | -44.91% | +7.81% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.76% | -0.37% | -0.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.40% | -12.25% | +1.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.05% | 4.49% | -1.44% |
Volatility
FCTR vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Lunt U.S. Factor Rotation ETF (FCTR) is 6.82%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that FCTR 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
| FCTR | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.82% | 9.20% | -2.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.84% | 22.92% | -11.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.53% | 28.27% | -10.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.64% | 28.91% | -9.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.94% | 30.72% | -8.78% |
FCTR vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCTR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCTR vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison
FCTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.35%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCTR First Trust Lunt U.S. Factor Rotation ETF | 0.35% | 0.30% | 0.82% | 1.04% | 1.38% | 0.46% | 0.44% | 0.98% | 0.66% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FCTR and IQM have a correlation of 0.75, 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 FCTR (6.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCTR dropped -37.10% vs IQM's -44.91%.
On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 4.29% for FCTR. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FCTR has been the lower-risk option at 6.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 4.29%. 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 FCTR.
FCTR has the higher dividend yield at 0.35%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for FCTR and 0.50% for IQM.
IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.34), 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 FCTR 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