TTAC vs. IQM
TTAC (TrimTabs US Free Cash Flow Quality ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, TTAC returned 12.94%/yr vs 21.97%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TTAC charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.
Performance
TTAC vs. IQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TTAC achieves a 18.93% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 44.08% return.
TTAC
- 1D
- 1.39%
- 1M
- 3.86%
- YTD
- 18.93%
- 6M
- 16.87%
- 1Y
- 24.51%
- 3Y*
- 19.15%
- 5Y*
- 12.94%
- 10Y*
- —
IQM
- 1D
- 1.35%
- 1M
- 10.43%
- YTD
- 44.08%
- 6M
- 40.98%
- 1Y
- 79.61%
- 3Y*
- 38.44%
- 5Y*
- 21.97%
- 10Y*
- —
TTAC vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TTAC TrimTabs US Free Cash Flow Quality ETF | 18.93% | 8.07% | 18.26% | 22.97% | -14.60% | 30.66% | 21.57% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 44.08% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 41.06% | -33.36% | 25.18% | 76.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between TTAC 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2020 | 0.83 |
The correlation between TTAC and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
TTAC vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
TTAC
IQM
Technology
Financial Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
-
Communication Services
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
TTAC
IQM
Financial Services
TTAC
IQM
-
Consumer Cyclical
TTAC
IQM
Healthcare
TTAC
IQM
Industrials
TTAC
IQM
Consumer Defensive
TTAC
IQM
-
Communication Services
TTAC
IQM
Energy
TTAC
IQM
Basic Materials
TTAC
IQM
-
Real Estate
TTAC
IQM
-
Utilities
TTAC
-
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
TTAC vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank
TTAC
IQM
TTAC vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrimTabs US Free Cash Flow Quality ETF (TTAC) 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.
| TTAC | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.42 | -0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.43 | 5.44 | -2.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.98 | 17.08 | -6.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TTAC vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TTAC drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TTAC and IQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TTAC | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.95% | -44.91% | +9.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.17% | -14.71% | +7.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.92% | -30.42% | +10.50% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.88% | -44.91% | +23.03% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.97% | -12.18% | +7.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.24% | 4.68% | -2.44% |
Volatility
TTAC vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for TrimTabs US Free Cash Flow Quality ETF (TTAC) is 5.90%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 13.76%. This indicates that TTAC 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
| TTAC | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.90% | 13.76% | -7.86% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.66% | 25.34% | -12.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.12% | 30.87% | -14.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.25% | 29.43% | -12.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.75% | 31.01% | -12.26% |
TTAC vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
TTAC has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
TTAC vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison
TTAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TTAC TrimTabs US Free Cash Flow Quality ETF | 0.53% | 0.62% | 0.70% | 0.94% | 1.36% | 9.63% | 0.41% | 0.72% | 0.62% | 0.40% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TTAC 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.
IQM has higher volatility (13.76%) compared to TTAC (5.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TTAC dropped -34.95% vs IQM's -44.91%.
On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 21.97% vs 12.94% for TTAC. On fees, IQM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, TTAC has been the lower-risk option at 5.90%. 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 21.97% return vs 12.94%. 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 0.59% for TTAC.
TTAC has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.
They also come from different issuers: TrimTabs and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for TTAC and 0.50% for IQM.
IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 1.53), 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.
Find the right allocation for TTAC 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