IQM vs. BAI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) and BAI (iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IQM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while BAI is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, IQM returned 75.07% vs 97.95% for BAI. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IQM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for BAI.

Performance

IQM vs. BAI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IQM achieves a 40.18% return, which is significantly lower than BAI's 55.29% return.

IQM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 11.94%
• YTD: 40.18%
• 6M: 38.57%
• 1Y: 75.07%
• 3Y*: 37.62%
• 5Y*: 22.22%
• 10Y*: —

BAI

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 18.14%
• YTD: 55.29%
• 6M: 51.89%
• 1Y: 97.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IQM vs. BAI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	4.94%
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	55.29%	25.22%	8.06%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and BAI is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 23, 2024	0.92

The correlation between IQM and BAI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

IQM vs. BAI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IQM	BAI
Technology	65.9%	83.2%
Industrials	19.9%	6.7%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	2.6%
Utilities	3.3%	-
Energy	2.7%	-
Communication Services	2.1%	6.8%
Healthcare	1.1%	0.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

IQM vs. BAI — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

BAI

BAI Risk / Return Rank: 82
BAI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
BAI Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BAI Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BAI Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BAI 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.

IQM vs. BAI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI). 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.

	IQM	BAI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.67	3.04	-0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	3.41	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.46	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.13	6.07	-0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.79	16.57	+0.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IQM vs. BAI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the BAI Sharpe Ratio of 3.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQM and BAI, 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

	IQM	BAI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.67	3.04	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.96	1.69	-0.72

Drawdowns

IQM vs. BAI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, which is greater than BAI's maximum drawdown of -34.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and BAI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IQM	BAI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.91%	-34.09%	-10.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.71%	-16.22%	+1.51%
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	-0.37%	-0.40%	+0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.25%	-6.93%	-5.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.49%	5.93%	-1.44%

Volatility

IQM vs. BAI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) is 9.20%, while iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI) has a volatility of 11.32%. This indicates that IQM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IQM	BAI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.20%	11.32%	-2.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.92%	26.16%	-3.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.27%	32.43%	-4.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.91%	35.06%	-6.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.72%	35.06%	-4.34%

IQM vs. BAI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BAI's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

IQM vs. BAI - Dividend Comparison

IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAI iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF	1.16%	1.80%	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 IQM and BAI in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, IQM and BAI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, IQM or BAI?

BAI has higher volatility (11.32%) compared to IQM (9.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs BAI's -34.09%.

Which ETF is better, IQM or BAI?

On 1-year performance, BAI leads with 97.95% vs 75.07% for IQM. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, IQM or BAI?

Over the 1-year period, BAI has performed better with a 97.95% return vs 75.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IQM or BAI?

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

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

BAI has the higher dividend yield at 1.16%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between IQM and BAI?

IQM is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BAI is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.55% for BAI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.04 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.