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

Performance

IQM vs. VUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). 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 VUG's 9.49% return.


IQM

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

VUG

1D
-1.23%
1M
6.22%
YTD
9.49%
6M
8.72%
1Y
27.84%
3Y*
25.93%
5Y*
15.11%
10Y*
18.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IQM vs. VUG - 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%
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
9.49%19.40%32.69%46.83%-33.16%27.35%45.46%

Correlation

The correlation between IQM and VUG is 0.80, 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

0.80

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

0.86

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

0.90

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

0.89

The correlation between IQM and VUG shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.90 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IQM vs. VUG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IQM
VUG

Technology

65.9%
53.5%

Industrials

19.9%
3.6%

Consumer Cyclical

4.1%
12.2%

Utilities

3.3%
0.9%

Energy

2.7%
0.4%

Communication Services

2.1%
17.3%

Healthcare

1.1%
4.6%

Basic Materials

-

0.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.5%

Financial Services

-

4.3%

Real Estate

-

1.0%

Technology

IQM
65.9%
VUG
53.5%

Industrials

IQM
19.9%
VUG
3.6%

Consumer Cyclical

IQM
4.1%
VUG
12.2%

Utilities

IQM
3.3%
VUG
0.9%

Energy

IQM
2.7%
VUG
0.4%

Communication Services

IQM
2.1%
VUG
17.3%

Healthcare

IQM
1.1%
VUG
4.6%

Basic Materials

IQM

-

VUG
0.6%

Consumer Defensive

IQM

-

VUG
1.5%

Financial Services

IQM

-

VUG
4.3%

Real Estate

IQM

-

VUG
1.0%

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. VUG — 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

VUG
VUG Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
VUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
VUG Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
VUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
VUG Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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. VUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


IQMVUGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.90

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.31

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.13

1.69

+3.44

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.79

5.92

+10.86

IQM vs. VUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IQM Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is higher than the VUG Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IQM and VUG, 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


IQMVUGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

1.77

+0.90

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.68

+0.09

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

0.62

+0.34

Drawdowns

IQM vs. VUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IQM drawdown since its inception was -44.91%, smaller than the maximum VUG drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IQM and VUG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IQMVUGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.91%

-50.68%

+5.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.71%

-16.53%

+1.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.42%

-22.85%

-7.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.91%

-35.61%

-9.30%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

-1.51%

+1.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.25%

-7.09%

-5.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.49%

4.71%

-0.22%

Volatility

IQM vs. VUG - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a higher volatility of 9.20% compared to Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) at 3.83%. This indicates that IQM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VUG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IQMVUGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.20%

3.83%

+5.37%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.92%

12.11%

+10.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.27%

15.84%

+12.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.91%

22.22%

+6.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.72%

21.44%

+9.28%

IQM vs. VUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IQM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than VUG's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

IQM vs. VUG - Dividend Comparison

IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VUG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%.


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%
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
0.37%0.41%0.47%0.58%0.70%0.48%0.66%0.95%1.32%1.14%1.39%1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


IQM and VUG have a correlation of 0.80, 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 VUG (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IQM dropped -44.91% vs VUG's -50.68%.

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 15.11% for VUG. On fees, VUG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VUG has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. 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 15.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VUG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

VUG has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for IQM and 0.03% for VUG.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 1.77), 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 VUG

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