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 40.18% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 6.42% return.


IQM

1D
-0.37%
1M
11.94%
YTD
40.18%
6M
38.57%
1Y
75.07%
3Y*
37.62%
5Y*
22.22%
10Y*

SCHG

1D
-1.23%
1M
4.81%
YTD
6.42%
6M
5.81%
1Y
24.64%
3Y*
25.02%
5Y*
15.59%
10Y*
18.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IQM vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
40.18%30.76%31.03%41.06%-33.36%25.18%78.48%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
6.42%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%45.02%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and SCHG is 0.79, 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

0.79

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

0.86

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020

0.88

The correlation between IQM and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (1 year) to 0.89 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IQM vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IQM
SCHG

Technology

65.9%
46.3%

Industrials

19.9%
5.8%

Consumer Cyclical

4.1%
12.7%

Utilities

3.3%
0.4%

Energy

2.7%
0.8%

Communication Services

2.1%
16.0%

Healthcare

1.1%
7.7%

Basic Materials

-

1.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.7%

Financial Services

-

6.7%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Technology

IQM
65.9%
SCHG
46.3%

Industrials

IQM
19.9%
SCHG
5.8%

Consumer Cyclical

IQM
4.1%
SCHG
12.7%

Utilities

IQM
3.3%
SCHG
0.4%

Energy

IQM
2.7%
SCHG
0.8%

Communication Services

IQM
2.1%
SCHG
16.0%

Healthcare

IQM
1.1%
SCHG
7.7%

Basic Materials

IQM

-

SCHG
1.4%

Consumer Defensive

IQM

-

SCHG
1.7%

Financial Services

IQM

-

SCHG
6.7%

Real Estate

IQM

-

SCHG
0.5%

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

IQM
IQM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
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. 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.


IQMSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.28

+0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.13

1.51

+3.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.79

5.04

+11.74

IQM vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is higher than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IQMSCHGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

1.60

+1.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.70

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

0.84

+0.12

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

-14.71%

-16.41%

+1.70%

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

-0.37%

-1.78%

+1.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.25%

-5.20%

-7.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.49%

4.90%

-0.41%

Volatility

IQM vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 9.20% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 3.61%. 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

9.20%

3.61%

+5.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.92%

11.62%

+11.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.27%

15.50%

+12.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.91%

22.27%

+6.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.72%

21.55%

+9.17%

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 0.36%.


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
0.36%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 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to SCHG (3.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 15.59% for SCHG. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 3.61%. 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 22.22% return vs 15.59%. 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 0.36%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.04% for SCHG.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.60), 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