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

Performance

IQM vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 19.53% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 7.11% 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%

SCHG

1D
2.02%
1M
2.17%
6M
8.95%
YTD
7.11%
1Y
18.50%
3Y*
23.37%
5Y*
13.47%
10Y*
18.33%
ALL TIME*
16.47%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$905.23K$711.02K$931.48K
$249.58M$250.01M$339.80M

IQM vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
19.53%30.76%31.03%41.06%-33.36%25.18%76.92%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
7.11%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%38.27%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and SCHG is 0.73, 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.

0.73

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.83

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2020

0.87

The correlation between IQM and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IQM vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IQM
SCHG

Technology

70.5%
44.0%

Industrials

14.8%
7.6%

Utilities

3.5%
0.5%

Energy

3.1%
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

2.7%
11.2%

Communication Services

1.1%
14.1%

Healthcare

1.0%
9.9%

Basic Materials

-

1.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.9%

Financial Services

-

7.7%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Technology

IQM
70.5%
SCHG
44.0%

Industrials

IQM
14.8%
SCHG
7.6%

Utilities

IQM
3.5%
SCHG
0.5%

Energy

IQM
3.1%
SCHG
0.9%

Consumer Cyclical

IQM
2.7%
SCHG
11.2%

Communication Services

IQM
1.1%
SCHG
14.1%

Healthcare

IQM
1.0%
SCHG
9.9%

Basic Materials

IQM

-

SCHG
1.6%

Consumer Defensive

IQM

-

SCHG
1.9%

Financial Services

IQM

-

SCHG
7.7%

Real Estate

IQM

-

SCHG
0.6%

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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IQM
IQM Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.


IQMSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.20

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.39

1.13

+0.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.25

3.58

+1.67

IQM vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is comparable to the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQM and SCHG, 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. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IQMSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.91%

-34.59%

-10.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-25.28%

-16.41%

-8.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.42%

-23.39%

-7.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.91%

-34.59%

-10.32%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-17.03%

-1.15%

-15.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.20%

-5.19%

-7.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.66%

5.19%

+1.47%

Volatility

IQM vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 15.54% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 4.76%. This indicates that IQM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IQMSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

15.54%

4.76%

+10.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

31.13%

13.02%

+18.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.17%

16.66%

+19.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

30.64%

22.45%

+8.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.69%

21.60%

+10.09%

IQM vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

IQM vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%0.00%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.38%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


IQM and SCHG have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IQM has higher volatility (15.54%) compared to SCHG (4.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 15.99% vs 13.47% for SCHG. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 4.76%. 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 15.99% return vs 13.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

SCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

IQM is categorized as Technology Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.04% for SCHG.

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.12 vs 0.97), 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 SCHG

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