STNC vs. IQM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

STNC (Hennessy Stance ESG ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, STNC returned 7.12%/yr vs 15.91%/yr for IQM. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. STNC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

STNC vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hennessy Stance ESG ETF (STNC) 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, STNC achieves a 11.50% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 17.24% return.

STNC

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: -0.41%
• 6M: 6.93%
• YTD: 11.50%
• 1Y: 20.36%
• 3Y*: 11.71%
• 5Y*: 7.12%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.09%

IQM

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: -8.20%
• 6M: 11.29%
• YTD: 17.24%
• 1Y: 32.29%
• 3Y*: 27.64%
• 5Y*: 15.91%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 24.95%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	$879.80K	$730.37K	$921.63K
STNC Hennessy Stance ESG ETF	$80.91K	$76.39K	$55.00K

STNC vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
STNC Hennessy Stance ESG ETF	11.50%	10.33%	8.92%	11.49%	-13.10%	17.04%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	17.24%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	24.35%

Correlation

The correlation between STNC and IQM is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.59
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2021	0.68

The correlation between STNC and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

STNC vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	STNC	IQM
Technology	27.3%	70.5%
Consumer Cyclical	17.9%	2.7%
Healthcare	12.7%	1.0%
Industrials	11.6%	14.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	-
Financial Services	6.3%	-
Communication Services	6.2%	1.1%
Utilities	4.6%	3.5%
Basic Materials	3.5%	-
Real Estate	3.0%	-
Energy	-	3.1%

Return for Risk

STNC vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

STNC

STNC Risk / Return Rank: 58
STNC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
STNC Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
STNC Omega Ratio Rank: 50
STNC Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
STNC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 35
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 34
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 35
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 42

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

STNC vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hennessy Stance ESG ETF (STNC) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	STNC	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.32	0.83	+0.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.99	1.26	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.16	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	1.18	+1.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.25	4.54	+2.71

STNC vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current STNC Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is higher than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 0.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of STNC 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.

Drawdowns

STNC vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum STNC drawdown since its inception was -22.33%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for STNC and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	STNC	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.33%	-44.91%	+22.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.09%	-25.28%	+17.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.90%	-30.42%	+12.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.33%	-44.91%	+22.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.06%	-18.62%	+14.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.82%	-12.19%	+6.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.66%	6.58%	-3.92%

Volatility

STNC vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hennessy Stance ESG ETF (STNC) is 3.41%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 16.22%. This indicates that STNC 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

	STNC	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.41%	16.22%	-12.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.08%	31.20%	-19.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.71%	36.13%	-21.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.74%	30.62%	-14.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.46%	31.69%	-16.23%

STNC vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

STNC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

STNC vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

STNC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, 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%
STNC Hennessy Stance ESG ETF	0.91%	1.02%	0.96%	0.08%	0.58%	0.41%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both STNC and IQM in my portfolio?

STNC and IQM have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, STNC or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (16.22%) compared to STNC (3.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, STNC dropped -22.33% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, STNC or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 15.91% vs 7.12% for STNC. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, STNC has been the lower-risk option at 3.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, STNC or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 15.91% return vs 7.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, STNC or IQM?

IQM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for STNC.

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

STNC has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between STNC and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Hennessy and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for STNC and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

STNC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.83), 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.