FFOG vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FFOG (Franklin Focused Growth ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds from Franklin Templeton. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FFOG returned 23.96% vs 75.07% for IQM. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFOG charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

FFOG vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) 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, FFOG achieves a 10.66% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.

FFOG

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 5.98%
• YTD: 10.66%
• 6M: 9.70%
• 1Y: 23.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 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*: —

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

FFOG vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF	10.66%	17.09%	38.20%	12.41%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	31.03%	15.26%

Correlation

The correlation between FFOG and IQM is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023	0.89

The correlation between FFOG and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

FFOG vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FFOG	IQM
Technology	56.0%	65.9%
Consumer Cyclical	13.7%	4.1%
Communication Services	13.5%	2.1%
Healthcare	5.7%	1.1%
Industrials	4.9%	19.9%
Financial Services	2.1%	-
Utilities	1.4%	3.3%
Energy	0.7%	2.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

FFOG vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFOG

FFOG Risk / Return Rank: 29
FFOG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
FFOG Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
FFOG Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FFOG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
FFOG Martin Ratio Rank: 25

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 78
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

FFOG vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) 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.

	FFOG	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	2.67	-1.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.67	3.11	-1.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.43	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.10	5.13	-4.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.25	16.79	-13.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFOG vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFOG Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFOG 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

	FFOG	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.20	2.67	-1.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.77	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.32	0.96	+0.36

Drawdowns

FFOG vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFOG drawdown since its inception was -25.38%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFOG and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFOG	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.38%	-44.91%	+19.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.90%	-14.71%	-7.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.42%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.37%	-0.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.59%	-12.25%	+7.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.39%	4.49%	+2.90%

Volatility

FFOG vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) is 4.75%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that FFOG 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

	FFOG	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.75%	9.20%	-4.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.44%	22.92%	-7.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.03%	28.27%	-8.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.79%	28.91%	-5.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.79%	30.72%	-6.93%

FFOG vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFOG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFOG vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

Neither FFOG nor IQM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both FFOG and IQM in my portfolio?

FFOG and IQM have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFOG or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to FFOG (4.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFOG dropped -25.38% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, FFOG or IQM?

On 1-year performance, IQM leads with 75.07% vs 23.96% for FFOG. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FFOG has been the lower-risk option at 4.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFOG or IQM?

Over the 1-year period, IQM has performed better with a 75.07% return vs 23.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFOG or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for FFOG.

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

FFOG and IQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FFOG and IQM?

Their fees differ too: 0.55% for FFOG and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.20), 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.