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

Performance

NWLG vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


NWLG

1D
1M
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
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)

NWLG vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
NWLG
Nuveen Winslow Large-Cap Growth ESG ETF
-10.63%13.21%29.17%43.55%-31.52%5.24%
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
40.18%30.76%31.03%41.06%-33.36%8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between NWLG and IQM is 0.71, 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

0.71

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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2021

0.89

The correlation between NWLG and IQM shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.89 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

NWLG vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NWLG
IQM

Technology

48.0%
65.9%

Communication Services

14.7%
2.1%

Industrials

12.4%
19.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.3%
4.1%

Healthcare

6.7%
1.1%

Financial Services

5.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

1.0%

-

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Energy

-

2.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

3.3%

Technology

NWLG
48.0%
IQM
65.9%

Communication Services

NWLG
14.7%
IQM
2.1%

Industrials

NWLG
12.4%
IQM
19.9%

Consumer Cyclical

NWLG
10.3%
IQM
4.1%

Healthcare

NWLG
6.7%
IQM
1.1%

Financial Services

NWLG
5.9%
IQM

-

Consumer Defensive

NWLG
1.0%
IQM

-

Basic Materials

NWLG
1.0%
IQM

-

Energy

NWLG

-

IQM
2.7%

Real Estate

NWLG

-

IQM

-

Utilities

NWLG

-

IQM
3.3%

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

NWLG vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

NWLG

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.

NWLG vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Winslow Large-Cap Growth ESG ETF (NWLG) 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

NWLG vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NWLGIQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

Drawdowns

NWLG vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NWLGIQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.42%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-12.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.49%

Volatility

NWLG vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NWLGIQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.27%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

30.72%

NWLG vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

NWLG has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

NWLG vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

NWLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.71%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.17%0.01%
NWLG
Nuveen Winslow Large-Cap Growth ESG ETF
15.71%0.00%0.00%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


NWLG and IQM have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for NWLG.

NWLG has the higher dividend yield at 15.71%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for NWLG and 0.50% for IQM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NWLG 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