TMFC vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TMFC (Motley Fool 100 Index ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. TMFC is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, TMFC returned 14.15%/yr vs 20.13%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

TMFC vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) 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, TMFC achieves a 4.32% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 35.15% return.

TMFC

• 1D: -1.24%
• 1M: -3.39%
• YTD: 4.32%
• 6M: 3.34%
• 1Y: 20.43%
• 3Y*: 23.57%
• 5Y*: 14.15%
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: -6.20%
• 1M: 3.59%
• YTD: 35.15%
• 6M: 31.71%
• 1Y: 66.07%
• 3Y*: 35.52%
• 5Y*: 20.13%
• 10Y*: —

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

TMFC vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	4.32%	19.55%	35.17%	47.04%	-30.86%	25.30%	40.10%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	35.15%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	76.92%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFC and IQM is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2020	0.86

The correlation between TMFC and IQM shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

TMFC vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMFC	IQM
Technology	44.5%	68.4%
Communication Services	16.6%	2.3%
Financial Services	12.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	2.9%
Healthcare	4.4%	1.0%
Industrials	4.0%	17.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	-
Energy	1.7%	2.3%
Real Estate	0.9%	-
Basic Materials	0.6%	-
Utilities	0.4%	3.2%

Return for Risk

TMFC vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFC

TMFC Risk / Return Rank: 39
TMFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
TMFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
TMFC Omega Ratio Rank: 40
TMFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
TMFC Martin Ratio Rank: 39

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 70
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 61
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

TMFC vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) 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.

	TMFC	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	2.11	-0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.00	2.52	-0.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.35	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	4.52	-2.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.87	14.13	-8.26

TMFC vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFC 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

TMFC vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFC drawdown since its inception was -33.06%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFC and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFC	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.06%	-44.91%	+11.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.64%	-14.71%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.06%	-30.42%	+10.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.06%	-44.91%	+11.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.87%	-6.20%	+1.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.75%	-12.18%	+5.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	4.69%	-1.20%

Volatility

TMFC vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) is 5.44%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 15.34%. This indicates that TMFC 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

	TMFC	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.44%	15.34%	-9.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.19%	26.16%	-14.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.27%	31.47%	-17.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.48%	29.56%	-9.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.00%	31.10%	-9.10%

TMFC vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both TMFC and IQM have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

TMFC vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

TMFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.17%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%
TMFC Motley Fool 100 Index ETF	0.14%	0.14%	0.40%	0.26%	0.27%	0.23%	0.42%	0.50%	0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFC and IQM in my portfolio?

TMFC and IQM have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFC or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (15.34%) compared to TMFC (5.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFC dropped -33.06% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, TMFC or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 20.13% vs 14.15% for TMFC. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, TMFC has been the lower-risk option at 5.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMFC or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 20.13% return vs 14.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFC or IQM?

TMFC and IQM have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

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

TMFC has the higher dividend yield at 0.14%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between TMFC and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and Franklin Templeton.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.44), 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.