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

Performance

QRFT vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) 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, QRFT achieves a 12.60% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.


QRFT

1D
-0.34%
1M
6.39%
YTD
12.60%
6M
12.89%
1Y
28.98%
3Y*
21.65%
5Y*
12.39%
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)

QRFT vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
QRFT
QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF
12.60%17.95%21.36%24.16%-22.69%22.74%47.55%
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
40.18%30.76%31.03%41.06%-33.36%25.18%78.48%

Correlation

The correlation between QRFT and IQM is 0.81, 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

0.81

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

0.83

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

0.86

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

0.86

The correlation between QRFT and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

QRFT vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QRFT
IQM

Technology

35.4%
65.9%

Financial Services

10.7%

-

Communication Services

10.2%
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
4.1%

Industrials

9.7%
19.9%

Healthcare

8.8%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.7%

-

Energy

4.2%
2.7%

Basic Materials

2.0%

-

Utilities

1.4%
3.3%

Real Estate

1.0%

-

Technology

QRFT
35.4%
IQM
65.9%

Financial Services

QRFT
10.7%
IQM

-

Communication Services

QRFT
10.2%
IQM
2.1%

Consumer Cyclical

QRFT
10.1%
IQM
4.1%

Industrials

QRFT
9.7%
IQM
19.9%

Healthcare

QRFT
8.8%
IQM
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

QRFT
6.7%
IQM

-

Energy

QRFT
4.2%
IQM
2.7%

Basic Materials

QRFT
2.0%
IQM

-

Utilities

QRFT
1.4%
IQM
3.3%

Real Estate

QRFT
1.0%
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

QRFT vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QRFT
QRFT Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
QRFT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QRFT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
QRFT Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
QRFT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
QRFT Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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.

QRFT vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) 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.


QRFTIQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.43

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.19

5.13

-1.94

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.12

16.79

-2.67

QRFT vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QRFT Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QRFT 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


QRFTIQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.23

2.67

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

0.77

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

0.96

-0.10

Drawdowns

QRFT vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QRFT drawdown since its inception was -30.19%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QRFT and IQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QRFTIQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.19%

-44.91%

+14.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.12%

-14.71%

+5.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.99%

-30.42%

+10.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.20%

-44.91%

+16.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.34%

-0.37%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.79%

-12.25%

+5.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.06%

4.49%

-2.43%

Volatility

QRFT vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT) is 3.45%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that QRFT 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


QRFTIQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.45%

9.20%

-5.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.97%

22.92%

-12.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.08%

28.27%

-15.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.34%

28.91%

-11.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.10%

30.72%

-10.62%

QRFT vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QRFT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

QRFT vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

QRFT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
IQM
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.17%0.01%0.00%
QRFT
QRAFT AI Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF
0.25%0.27%0.52%0.77%0.83%0.05%1.81%4.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QRFT and IQM have a correlation of 0.81, 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 QRFT (3.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QRFT dropped -30.19% vs IQM's -44.91%.

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 12.39% for QRFT. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QRFT has been the lower-risk option at 3.45%. 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 12.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for QRFT.

QRFT has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

They also come from different issuers: Exchange Traded Concepts and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for QRFT and 0.50% for IQM.

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.23), 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 QRFT 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