TMAT vs. AIQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TMAT (Main Thematic Innovation ETF) and AIQ (Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - TMAT tracks the MSCI ACWI Index while AIQ tracks the Indxx Artificial Intelligence & Big Data Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMAT returned 4.62%/yr vs 16.16%/yr for AIQ. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TMAT charges 1.49%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for AIQ.

Performance

TMAT vs. AIQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) and Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMAT achieves a 18.93% return, which is significantly lower than AIQ's 24.56% return.

TMAT

• 1D: -3.52%
• 1M: 3.97%
• YTD: 18.93%
• 6M: 16.10%
• 1Y: 34.95%
• 3Y*: 27.57%
• 5Y*: 4.62%
• 10Y*: —

AIQ

• 1D: -5.57%
• 1M: 0.86%
• YTD: 24.56%
• 6M: 23.60%
• 1Y: 51.28%
• 3Y*: 32.41%
• 5Y*: 16.16%
• 10Y*: —

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

TMAT vs. AIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	18.93%	20.06%	27.20%	32.32%	-39.29%	-18.01%
AIQ Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF	24.56%	31.89%	24.11%	55.39%	-36.44%	13.38%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAT and AIQ is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2021	0.87

The correlation between TMAT and AIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

TMAT vs. AIQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMAT	AIQ
Technology	53.0%	77.4%
Industrials	23.0%	3.4%
Basic Materials	11.2%	-
Healthcare	8.7%	0.4%
Communication Services	2.4%	11.0%
Utilities	2.2%	-
Financial Services	2.1%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	1.6%	7.2%
Energy	0.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

TMAT vs. AIQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAT

TMAT Risk / Return Rank: 36
TMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
TMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
TMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 37
TMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
TMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 29

AIQ

AIQ Risk / Return Rank: 58
AIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
AIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
AIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 56
AIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
AIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

TMAT vs. AIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) and Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ). 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.

	TMAT	AIQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.94	-0.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	2.44	-0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.34	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	3.13	-1.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.77	10.06	-6.29

TMAT vs. AIQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the AIQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAT and AIQ, 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

TMAT vs. AIQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAT drawdown since its inception was -58.55%, which is greater than AIQ's maximum drawdown of -44.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAT and AIQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAT	AIQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.55%	-44.66%	-13.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.63%	-16.47%	-5.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.42%	-26.35%	-7.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.10%	-44.66%	-7.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.36%	-9.68%	+5.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.93%	-9.78%	-22.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.30%	5.11%	+4.19%

Volatility

TMAT vs. AIQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) is 11.45%, while Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF (AIQ) has a volatility of 15.10%. This indicates that TMAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMAT	AIQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.45%	15.10%	-3.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.86%	22.68%	-3.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.75%	26.54%	-0.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.83%	26.01%	+4.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.75%	25.84%	+4.91%

TMAT vs. AIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMAT has a 1.49% expense ratio, which is higher than AIQ's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMAT vs. AIQ - Dividend Comparison

TMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than AIQ's 0.15% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AIQ Global X Artificial Intelligence & Technology ETF	0.15%	0.18%	0.14%	0.16%	0.56%	0.15%	0.50%	0.51%	0.51%
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAT and AIQ in my portfolio?

TMAT and AIQ have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMAT or AIQ?

AIQ has higher volatility (15.10%) compared to TMAT (11.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAT dropped -58.55% vs AIQ's -44.66%.

Which ETF is better, TMAT or AIQ?

On 5-year performance, AIQ leads with 16.16% vs 4.62% for TMAT. On fees, AIQ is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, TMAT has been the lower-risk option at 11.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMAT or AIQ?

Over the 5-year period, AIQ has performed better with a 16.16% return vs 4.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAT or AIQ?

AIQ is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for TMAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMAT or AIQ?

AIQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.15%, compared with 0.02% for TMAT.

What is the main difference between TMAT and AIQ?

TMAT tracks MSCI ACWI Index, while AIQ tracks Indxx Artificial Intelligence & Big Data Index. They also come from different issuers: Main Management and Global X. Their fees differ too: 1.49% for TMAT and 0.68% for AIQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.36), 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.