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

Performance

IWFG vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWFG achieves a 2.08% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.


IWFG

1D
-1.30%
1M
4.41%
YTD
2.08%
6M
1.13%
1Y
11.87%
3Y*
23.02%
5Y*
10Y*

IQM

1D
-0.37%
1M
11.94%
YTD
40.18%
6M
38.57%
1Y
75.07%
3Y*
37.62%
5Y*
22.22%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWFG vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
IWFG
NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
2.08%14.33%37.56%38.40%3.75%
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
40.18%30.76%31.03%41.06%3.39%

Correlation

The correlation between IWFG and IQM 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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2022

0.88

The correlation between IWFG and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWFG vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IWFG
IQM

Technology

52.4%
65.9%

Communication Services

13.3%
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
4.1%

Industrials

7.5%
19.9%

Healthcare

5.5%
1.1%

Financial Services

4.8%

-

Utilities

4.0%
3.3%

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

2.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

IWFG
52.4%
IQM
65.9%

Communication Services

IWFG
13.3%
IQM
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

IWFG
11.0%
IQM
4.1%

Industrials

IWFG
7.5%
IQM
19.9%

Healthcare

IWFG
5.5%
IQM
1.1%

Financial Services

IWFG
4.8%
IQM

-

Utilities

IWFG
4.0%
IQM
3.3%

Basic Materials

IWFG

-

IQM

-

Consumer Defensive

IWFG

-

IQM

-

Energy

IWFG

-

IQM
2.7%

Real Estate

IWFG

-

IQM

-

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

IWFG vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWFG
IWFG Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
IWFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWFG Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
IWFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWFG Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

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
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.

IWFG vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). 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.


IWFGIQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.95

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.43

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.59

5.13

-4.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.73

16.79

-15.06

IWFG vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWFG and IQM, 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


IWFGIQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

2.67

-1.95

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.16

0.96

+0.20

Drawdowns

IWFG vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWFG drawdown since its inception was -21.97%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWFG and IQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IWFGIQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.97%

-44.91%

+22.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-20.20%

-14.71%

-5.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.97%

-30.42%

+8.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.79%

-0.37%

-2.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.13%

-12.25%

+8.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

6.89%

4.49%

+2.40%

Volatility

IWFG vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF (IWFG) is 3.85%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that IWFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IWFGIQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.85%

9.20%

-5.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.59%

22.92%

-10.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.50%

28.27%

-11.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.48%

28.91%

-8.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.48%

30.72%

-10.24%

IWFG vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWFG has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is lower than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

IWFG vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

Neither IWFG nor IQM has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.17%0.01%
IWFG
NYLI Winslow Focused Large Cap Growth ETF
0.00%0.00%5.44%1.01%0.05%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IWFG and IQM 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 IWFG (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWFG dropped -21.97% vs IQM's -44.91%.

On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 37.62% vs 23.02% for IWFG. On fees, IWFG is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, IWFG has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 37.62% return vs 23.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWFG is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

IWFG and IQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: New York Life and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.46% for IWFG and 0.50% for IQM.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 0.72), 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 IWFG and IQM

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