FFOG vs. IVRS
FFOG (Franklin Focused Growth ETF) and IVRS (iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFOG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while IVRS is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Morningstar Global Metaverse & Virtual Interaction Select Index - Benchmark TR Net. FFOG is actively managed, while IVRS is passively managed. Over the past year, FFOG returned 11.10% vs -13.83% for IVRS. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FFOG charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IVRS.
Performance
FFOG vs. IVRS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFOG achieves a 6.92% return, which is significantly higher than IVRS's -7.43% return.
FFOG
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- -0.52%
- 6M
- 15.09%
- YTD
- 6.92%
- 1Y
- 11.10%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 27.34%
IVRS
- 1D
- -1.55%
- 1M
- -2.44%
- 6M
- 5.39%
- YTD
- -7.43%
- 1Y
- -13.83%
- 3Y*
- 7.59%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.02%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $4.94M | $2.92M | $3.07M | |
| $51.89K | $33.84K | $22.55K |
FFOG vs. IVRS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF | 6.92% | 17.09% | 38.20% | 12.25% |
IVRS iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF | -7.43% | 12.75% | 7.40% | 12.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFOG and IVRS is 0.68, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.68 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 6, 2023 | 0.73 |
The correlation between FFOG and IVRS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.
FFOG vs. IVRS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFOG
IVRS
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Financial Services
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
FFOG
IVRS
Communication Services
FFOG
IVRS
Consumer Cyclical
FFOG
IVRS
Healthcare
FFOG
IVRS
-
Industrials
FFOG
IVRS
-
Financial Services
FFOG
IVRS
Utilities
FFOG
IVRS
-
Energy
FFOG
IVRS
-
Basic Materials
FFOG
-
IVRS
-
Consumer Defensive
FFOG
-
IVRS
-
Real Estate
FFOG
-
IVRS
-
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
FFOG vs. IVRS — Risk / Return Rank
FFOG
IVRS
FFOG vs. IVRS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) and iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF (IVRS). 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.
| FFOG | IVRS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 0.92 | +0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.51 | -0.44 | +0.95 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.42 | -0.82 | +2.24 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FFOG vs. IVRS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFOG drawdown since its inception was -25.38%, smaller than the maximum IVRS drawdown of -31.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFOG and IVRS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFOG | IVRS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.38% | -31.43% | +6.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.90% | -31.43% | +9.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -31.43% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.32% | -20.37% | +16.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.65% | -6.54% | +1.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.82% | 16.88% | -9.06% |
Volatility
FFOG vs. IVRS - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Focused Growth ETF (FFOG) has a higher volatility of 9.04% compared to iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF (IVRS) at 7.59%. This indicates that FFOG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IVRS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFOG | IVRS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.04% | 7.59% | +1.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.50% | 19.52% | -0.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.53% | 23.78% | -0.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.49% | 20.88% | +3.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.49% | 20.88% | +3.61% |
FFOG vs. IVRS - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFOG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IVRS's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFOG vs. IVRS - Dividend Comparison
FFOG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVRS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.65%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FFOG Franklin Focused Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IVRS iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF | 8.65% | 7.88% | 6.65% | 0.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFOG and IVRS 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.
FFOG has higher volatility (9.04%) compared to IVRS (7.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFOG dropped -25.38% vs IVRS's -31.43%.
On 1-year performance, FFOG leads with 11.10% vs -13.83% for IVRS. On fees, IVRS is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, IVRS has been the lower-risk option at 7.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FFOG has performed better with a 11.10% return vs -13.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IVRS is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for FFOG.
IVRS has the higher dividend yield at 8.65%, compared with 0.00% for FFOG.
FFOG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while IVRS is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for FFOG and 0.47% for IVRS.
FFOG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.47 vs -0.58), 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 FFOG and IVRS
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