IQM vs. IVRS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) and IVRS (iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. IQM is actively managed, while IVRS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IQM returned 30.20%/yr vs 7.73%/yr for IVRS. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IQM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IVRS.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IQM achieves a 19.53% return, which is significantly higher than IVRS's -7.07% return.

IQM

• 1D: 1.95%
• 1M: -6.41%
• 6M: 13.56%
• YTD: 19.53%
• 1Y: 34.87%
• 3Y*: 30.20%
• 5Y*: 15.99%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 25.29%

IVRS

• 1D: 2.16%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: -1.65%
• YTD: -7.07%
• 1Y: -11.56%
• 3Y*: 7.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.16%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	$905.23K	$711.02K	$931.48K
IVRS iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF	$45.64K	$34.99K	$21.63K

IQM vs. IVRS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	19.53%	30.76%	31.03%	19.39%
IVRS iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF	-7.07%	12.75%	7.40%	28.15%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and IVRS is 0.61, 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.	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 16, 2023	0.74

The correlation between IQM and IVRS shifts across timeframes, from 0.61 (1 year) to 0.74 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IQM vs. IVRS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IQM	IVRS
Technology	70.5%	31.8%
Industrials	14.8%	-
Utilities	3.5%	-
Energy	3.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.7%	4.0%
Communication Services	1.1%	46.3%
Healthcare	1.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	17.9%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

IQM vs. IVRS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 39
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 38
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 45

IVRS

IVRS Risk / Return Rank: 6
IVRS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
IVRS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
IVRS Omega Ratio Rank: 5
IVRS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
IVRS Martin Ratio Rank: 6

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

	IQM	IVRS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	-0.49	+1.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.42	-0.53	+1.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	0.94	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	-0.37	+1.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.25	-0.69	+5.94

IQM vs. IVRS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is higher than the IVRS Sharpe Ratio of -0.49. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	IQM	IVRS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.91%	-31.43%	-13.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.28%	-31.43%	+6.15%
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	-17.03%	-20.06%	+3.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.20%	-6.51%	-5.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.66%	16.79%	-10.13%

Volatility

IQM vs. IVRS - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 15.54% compared to iShares Future Metaverse Tech And Communications ETF (IVRS) at 7.97%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	IQM	IVRS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.54%	7.97%	+7.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.13%	19.96%	+11.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.17%	23.89%	+12.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.64%	20.88%	+9.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.69%	20.88%	+10.81%

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 8.62%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
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	8.62%	7.88%	6.65%	0.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IQM and IVRS in my portfolio?

IQM and IVRS have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IQM or IVRS?

IQM has higher volatility (15.54%) compared to IVRS (7.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs IVRS's -31.43%.

Which ETF is better, IQM or IVRS?

On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 30.20% vs 7.73% for IVRS. On fees, IVRS is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, IVRS has been the lower-risk option at 7.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IQM or IVRS?

Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 30.20% return vs 7.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IQM or IVRS?

IVRS is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

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

IVRS has the higher dividend yield at 8.62%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between IQM and IVRS?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.47% for IVRS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.97 vs -0.49), 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.