PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IQM vs. GQGU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IQM vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IQM achieves a 27.48% return, which is significantly higher than GQGU's 5.95% return.


IQM

1D
2.19%
1M
-4.67%
6M
16.81%
YTD
27.48%
1Y
47.04%
3Y*
30.36%
5Y*
18.79%
10Y*

GQGU

1D
-0.15%
1M
-0.42%
6M
6.34%
YTD
5.95%
1Y
4.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IQM vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
27.48%15.93%
GQGU
GQG US Equity ETF
5.95%-1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and GQGU is -0.38, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.38

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025

-0.38

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

IQM vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank

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

IQM
IQM Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

GQGU
GQGU Risk / Return Rank: 1717
Overall Rank
GQGU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GQGU Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
GQGU Omega Ratio Rank: 1616
Omega Ratio Rank
GQGU Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
GQGU Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.


IQMGQGUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.08

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.21

0.57

+2.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.10

1.38

+7.73

IQM vs. GQGU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is higher than the GQGU Sharpe Ratio of 0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQM and GQGU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IQM vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and GQGU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IQMGQGUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.91%

-8.41%

-36.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.71%

-8.41%

-6.30%

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

-11.52%

-5.24%

-6.28%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.15%

-2.89%

-9.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.18%

3.45%

+1.73%

Volatility

IQM vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 16.19% compared to GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) at 4.59%. This indicates that IQM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GQGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IQMGQGUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

16.19%

4.59%

+11.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

28.77%

8.53%

+20.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

33.72%

10.72%

+23.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.10%

10.72%

+19.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.38%

10.72%

+20.66%

IQM vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

IQM vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison

IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GQGU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
GQGU
GQG US Equity ETF
0.96%1.02%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


IQM and GQGU have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IQM has higher volatility (16.19%) compared to GQGU (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs GQGU's -8.41%.

On 1-year performance, IQM leads with 47.04% vs 4.74% for GQGU. On fees, GQGU is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, GQGU has been the lower-risk option at 4.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IQM has performed better with a 47.04% return vs 4.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GQGU is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.49% for GQGU.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.40 vs 0.44), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IQM and GQGU

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