FFND vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FFND (The Future Fund Active ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FFND returned 22.14%/yr vs 37.11%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFND charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

FFND vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Future Fund Active ETF (FFND) 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, FFND achieves a 7.78% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 38.49% return.

FFND

• 1D: 1.01%
• 1M: 3.86%
• YTD: 7.78%
• 6M: 7.46%
• 1Y: 21.90%
• 3Y*: 22.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: 9.28%
• YTD: 38.49%
• 6M: 34.62%
• 1Y: 72.20%
• 3Y*: 37.11%
• 5Y*: 21.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

FFND vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FFND The Future Fund Active ETF	7.78%	19.38%	24.05%	40.05%	-39.84%	-4.81%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	38.49%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between FFND and IQM is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2021	0.85

The correlation between FFND and IQM shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.85 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FFND vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FFND	IQM
Technology	26.1%	65.9%
Industrials	14.2%	19.9%
Financial Services	13.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	4.1%
Healthcare	11.0%	1.1%
Communication Services	10.9%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	-
Utilities	2.0%	3.3%
Basic Materials	1.7%	-
Energy	1.7%	2.7%
Real Estate	1.5%	-

Return for Risk

FFND vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFND

FFND Risk / Return Rank: 50
FFND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FFND Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FFND Omega Ratio Rank: 51
FFND Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
FFND Martin Ratio Rank: 54

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 77
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 70
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

FFND vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Future Fund Active ETF (FFND) 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.

	FFND	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.70	2.57	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	3.01	-0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.41	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.09	4.94	-2.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.16	16.15	-6.99
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFND vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFND Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFND 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FFND	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.70	2.57	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.95	-0.74

Drawdowns

FFND vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFND drawdown since its inception was -47.84%, which is greater than IQM's maximum drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFND and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFND	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.84%	-44.91%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.53%	-14.71%	+4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.90%	-30.42%	+11.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-1.57%	+1.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.77%	-12.24%	-6.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.40%	4.49%	-2.09%

Volatility

FFND vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for The Future Fund Active ETF (FFND) is 3.88%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.33%. This indicates that FFND 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

	FFND	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.88%	9.33%	-5.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.24%	22.97%	-12.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.93%	28.28%	-15.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.04%	28.90%	-3.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.04%	30.71%	-5.67%

FFND vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFND has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFND vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

FFND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FFND The Future Fund Active ETF	0.60%	0.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	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 FFND and IQM in my portfolio?

FFND and IQM have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFND or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.33%) compared to FFND (3.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFND dropped -47.84% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, FFND or IQM?

On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 37.11% vs 22.14% for FFND. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FFND has been the lower-risk option at 3.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFND or IQM?

Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 37.11% return vs 22.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFND or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for FFND.

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

FFND has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between FFND and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: The Future Fund and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for FFND and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 vs 1.70), 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.