IQM vs. LVHI
IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) and LVHI (Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IQM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while LVHI is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Hedged Index-NR. IQM is actively managed, while LVHI is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IQM returned 21.93%/yr vs 15.88%/yr for LVHI. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IQM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for LVHI.
Performance
IQM vs. LVHI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IQM achieves a 38.49% return, which is significantly higher than LVHI's 12.09% return.
IQM
- 1D
- -1.20%
- 1M
- 9.28%
- YTD
- 38.49%
- 6M
- 34.62%
- 1Y
- 72.20%
- 3Y*
- 37.11%
- 5Y*
- 21.93%
- 10Y*
- —
LVHI
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 12.09%
- 6M
- 13.88%
- 1Y
- 30.86%
- 3Y*
- 21.26%
- 5Y*
- 15.88%
- 10Y*
- —
IQM vs. LVHI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 38.49% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 41.06% | -33.36% | 25.18% | 78.48% |
LVHI Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF | 12.09% | 27.12% | 14.81% | 17.45% | 3.84% | 18.19% | -3.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between IQM and LVHI is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.37 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020 | 0.45 |
The correlation between IQM and LVHI shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (1 year) to 0.45 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
IQM vs. LVHI - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IQM
LVHI
Technology
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Utilities
Energy
Communication Services
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
IQM
LVHI
Industrials
IQM
LVHI
Consumer Cyclical
IQM
LVHI
Utilities
IQM
LVHI
Energy
IQM
LVHI
Communication Services
IQM
LVHI
Healthcare
IQM
LVHI
Basic Materials
IQM
-
LVHI
Consumer Defensive
IQM
-
LVHI
Financial Services
IQM
-
LVHI
Real Estate
IQM
-
LVHI
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. LVHI — Risk / Return Rank
IQM
LVHI
IQM vs. LVHI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (LVHI). 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 | LVHI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.72 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.47 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.62 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.94 | 5.10 | -0.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.15 | 21.22 | -5.08 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IQM | LVHI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.57 | 3.28 | -0.72 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.76 | 1.44 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.95 | 0.82 | +0.13 |
Drawdowns
IQM vs. LVHI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, which is greater than LVHI's maximum drawdown of -32.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and LVHI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IQM | LVHI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.91% | -32.31% | -12.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.71% | -6.08% | -8.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.42% | -11.99% | -18.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.91% | -11.99% | -32.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.57% | -1.23% | -0.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.24% | -3.52% | -8.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.49% | 1.46% | +3.03% |
Volatility
IQM vs. LVHI - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 9.33% compared to Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (LVHI) at 2.89%. This indicates that IQM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LVHI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IQM | LVHI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.33% | 2.89% | +6.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.97% | 7.50% | +15.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.28% | 9.45% | +18.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.90% | 11.06% | +17.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.71% | 13.76% | +16.95% |
IQM vs. LVHI - Expense Ratio Comparison
IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LVHI's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
IQM vs. LVHI - Dividend Comparison
IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LVHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.10%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LVHI Franklin International Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF | 6.10% | 4.92% | 3.98% | 8.12% | 7.74% | 4.13% | 3.97% | 6.67% | 10.67% | 3.38% | 2.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IQM and LVHI have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IQM has higher volatility (9.33%) compared to LVHI (2.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs LVHI's -32.31%.
On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 21.93% vs 15.88% for LVHI. On fees, LVHI is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, LVHI has been the lower-risk option at 2.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 21.93% return vs 15.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LVHI is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.
LVHI has the higher dividend yield at 6.10%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.
IQM is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while LVHI is Volatility Hedged Equity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.40% for LVHI.
LVHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.28 vs 2.57), 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 IQM and LVHI
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