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

Performance

IQM vs. IVRS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF (IVRS). 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 35.15% return, which is significantly higher than IVRS's -9.21% return.


IQM

1D
-6.20%
1M
3.59%
YTD
35.15%
6M
31.71%
1Y
66.07%
3Y*
35.52%
5Y*
20.13%
10Y*

IVRS

1D
-1.89%
1M
-4.92%
YTD
-9.21%
6M
-10.90%
1Y
-6.88%
3Y*
7.89%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IQM vs. IVRS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
35.15%30.76%31.03%19.39%
IVRS
iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF
-9.21%12.75%7.40%28.15%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and IVRS is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2023

0.76

The correlation between IQM and IVRS shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.76 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IQM vs. IVRS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IQM
IVRS

Technology

68.4%
51.6%

Industrials

17.1%

-

Utilities

3.2%

-

Consumer Cyclical

2.9%
3.1%

Energy

2.3%

-

Communication Services

2.3%
28.5%

Healthcare

1.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

19.9%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

IQM
68.4%
IVRS
51.6%

Industrials

IQM
17.1%
IVRS

-

Utilities

IQM
3.2%
IVRS

-

Consumer Cyclical

IQM
2.9%
IVRS
3.1%

Energy

IQM
2.3%
IVRS

-

Communication Services

IQM
2.3%
IVRS
28.5%

Healthcare

IQM
1.0%
IVRS

-

Basic Materials

IQM

-

IVRS

-

Consumer Defensive

IQM

-

IVRS

-

Financial Services

IQM

-

IVRS
19.9%

Real Estate

IQM

-

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

IQM vs. IVRS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IQM
IQM Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

IVRS
IVRS Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
IVRS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IVRS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
IVRS Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
IVRS Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
IVRS Martin Ratio Rank: 77
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. IVRS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


IQMIVRSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

0.97

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.52

-0.22

+4.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.13

-0.45

+14.58

IQM vs. IVRS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is higher than the IVRS Sharpe Ratio of -0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQM and IVRS, 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. IVRS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, which is greater than IVRS's maximum drawdown of -31.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and IVRS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IQMIVRSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.91%

-31.43%

-13.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.71%

-31.43%

+16.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.42%

-31.43%

+1.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.20%

-21.89%

+15.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.18%

-6.03%

-6.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.69%

15.29%

-10.60%

Volatility

IQM vs. IVRS - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 15.34% compared to iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF (IVRS) at 8.09%. This indicates that IQM'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


IQMIVRSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.34%

8.09%

+7.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.16%

19.82%

+6.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.47%

22.78%

+8.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.56%

20.71%

+8.85%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.10%

20.71%

+10.39%

IQM vs. IVRS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IVRS's 0.47% expense ratio.


Dividends

IQM vs. IVRS - Dividend Comparison

IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVRS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.82%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.17%0.01%
IVRS
iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF
8.82%7.88%6.65%0.48%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IQM and IVRS have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IQM has higher volatility (15.34%) compared to IVRS (8.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs IVRS's -31.43%.

On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 35.52% vs 7.89% for IVRS. On fees, IVRS is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, IVRS has been the lower-risk option at 8.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 35.52% return vs 7.89%. 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 0.50% for IQM.

IVRS has the higher dividend yield at 8.82%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

IQM 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: 0.50% for IQM and 0.47% for IVRS.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs -0.30), 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 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