QGRW vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. QGRW is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QGRW returned 29.10%/yr vs 37.62%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QGRW charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

QGRW vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QGRW achieves a 15.43% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.

QGRW

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: 9.03%
• YTD: 15.43%
• 6M: 14.57%
• 1Y: 35.66%
• 3Y*: 29.10%
• 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)

QGRW vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	15.43%	19.20%	34.85%	56.05%	-3.30%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-4.82%

Correlation

The correlation between QGRW and IQM is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 16, 2022	0.89

The correlation between QGRW and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

QGRW vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QGRW	IQM
Technology	52.1%	65.9%
Communication Services	17.8%	2.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.4%	4.1%
Industrials	8.0%	19.9%
Healthcare	4.3%	1.1%
Financial Services	4.1%	-
Energy	0.6%	2.7%
Consumer Defensive	0.5%	-
Utilities	0.4%	3.3%
Basic Materials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QGRW vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QGRW

QGRW Risk / Return Rank: 54
QGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
QGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
QGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 57
QGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
QGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 52

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 78
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

QGRW vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) 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.

	QGRW	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	2.67	-0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	3.11	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.43	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	5.13	-2.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.08	16.79	-7.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QGRW vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QGRW Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QGRW 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QGRW	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.06	2.67	-0.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.77	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.66	0.96	+0.69

Drawdowns

QGRW vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QGRW drawdown since its inception was -24.40%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QGRW and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QGRW	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.40%	-44.91%	+20.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.44%	-14.71%	-0.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.40%	-30.42%	+6.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-44.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.33%	-0.37%	-0.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-12.25%	+8.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.94%	4.49%	-0.55%

Volatility

QGRW vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund (QGRW) is 4.71%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that QGRW 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.

Volatility by Period

	QGRW	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.71%	9.20%	-4.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.67%	22.92%	-9.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.40%	28.27%	-10.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.08%	28.91%	-7.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.08%	30.72%	-9.64%

QGRW vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QGRW has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is lower than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

QGRW vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

QGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.07%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%	0.01%
QGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Growth Fund	0.07%	0.09%	0.14%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QGRW and IQM in my portfolio?

QGRW and IQM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QGRW or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to QGRW (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QGRW dropped -24.40% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, QGRW or IQM?

On 3-year performance, IQM leads with 37.62% vs 29.10% for QGRW. On fees, QGRW is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, QGRW has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QGRW or IQM?

Over the 3-year period, IQM has performed better with a 37.62% return vs 29.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QGRW or IQM?

QGRW is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QGRW or IQM?

QGRW has the higher dividend yield at 0.07%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between QGRW and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for QGRW and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.06), 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.