QQQJ vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQQJ (Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. QQQJ is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQQJ returned 7.69%/yr vs 22.22%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QQQJ charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

QQQJ vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ) 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, QQQJ achieves a 23.23% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.

QQQJ

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 11.40%
• YTD: 23.23%
• 6M: 23.58%
• 1Y: 46.58%
• 3Y*: 22.25%
• 5Y*: 7.69%
• 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)

QQQJ vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QQQJ Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	23.23%	20.44%	15.36%	13.68%	-28.25%	9.76%	15.25%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	19.31%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQJ and IQM is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2020	0.85

The correlation between QQQJ and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQJ vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQJ	IQM
Technology	39.3%	65.9%
Healthcare	18.3%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	4.1%
Industrials	11.2%	19.9%
Communication Services	6.8%	2.1%
Basic Materials	2.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	-
Energy	2.6%	2.7%
Utilities	2.6%	3.3%
Financial Services	1.0%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

QQQJ vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQJ

QQQJ Risk / Return Rank: 77
QQQJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QQQJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QQQJ Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QQQJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
QQQJ Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

QQQJ vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ) 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.

	QQQJ	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.59	2.67	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.47	3.11	+0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.43	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.95	5.13	-1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.03	16.79	+0.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQQJ vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQJ Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQJ 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

	QQQJ	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.59	2.67	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.77	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.48	0.96	-0.48

Drawdowns

QQQJ vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQJ drawdown since its inception was -39.57%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQJ and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQJ	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.57%	-44.91%	+5.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.84%	-14.71%	+2.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.46%	-30.42%	+7.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.57%	-44.91%	+5.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-0.37%	-0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.74%	-12.25%	-3.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	4.49%	-1.75%

Volatility

QQQJ vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQQJ) is 5.62%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that QQQJ 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

	QQQJ	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.62%	9.20%	-3.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.65%	22.92%	-8.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.09%	28.27%	-10.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.02%	28.91%	-6.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.06%	30.72%	-8.66%

QQQJ vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQJ has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQJ vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

QQQJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.71%, 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%
QQQJ Invesco NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF	0.71%	0.85%	0.77%	0.67%	0.76%	0.91%	0.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQJ and IQM in my portfolio?

QQQJ and IQM have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQJ or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to QQQJ (5.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQJ dropped -39.57% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, QQQJ or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 7.69% for QQQJ. On fees, QQQJ is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QQQJ has been the lower-risk option at 5.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQJ or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 7.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQJ or IQM?

QQQJ is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

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

QQQJ has the higher dividend yield at 0.71%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between QQQJ and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QQQJ and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.59), 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.