USMC vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

USMC (Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. USMC is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, USMC returned 15.68%/yr vs 22.83%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. USMC charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.

Performance

USMC vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF (USMC) 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, USMC achieves a 9.11% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.70% return.

USMC

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 5.62%
• YTD: 9.11%
• 6M: 8.87%
• 1Y: 24.67%
• 3Y*: 22.12%
• 5Y*: 15.68%
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: 3.49%
• 1M: 12.88%
• YTD: 40.70%
• 6M: 40.33%
• 1Y: 78.30%
• 3Y*: 37.79%
• 5Y*: 22.83%
• 10Y*: —

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

USMC vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
USMC Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF	9.11%	14.99%	29.82%	31.57%	-17.17%	26.30%	25.26%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.70%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	25.18%	78.48%

Correlation

The correlation between USMC and IQM is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020	0.80

The correlation between USMC and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

USMC vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	USMC	IQM
Technology	29.1%	65.9%
Financial Services	19.6%	-
Communication Services	14.7%	2.1%
Consumer Defensive	9.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	4.1%
Healthcare	8.1%	1.1%
Industrials	5.6%	19.9%
Energy	4.8%	2.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	3.3%

Return for Risk

USMC vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

USMC

USMC Risk / Return Rank: 57
USMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
USMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
USMC Omega Ratio Rank: 59
USMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
USMC Martin Ratio Rank: 54

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 80
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

USMC vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF (USMC) 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.

	USMC	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.79	-0.69
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	3.20	-0.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.44	-0.08
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	5.40	-2.95
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.38	17.71	-8.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

USMC vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USMC Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USMC 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	USMC	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	2.79	-0.69
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96	0.79	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.97	-0.13

Drawdowns

USMC vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USMC drawdown since its inception was -29.97%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USMC and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	USMC	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.97%	-44.91%	+14.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.30%	-14.71%	+4.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.12%	-30.42%	+11.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.09%	-44.91%	+20.82%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.41%	-12.25%	+7.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.69%	4.49%	-1.80%

Volatility

USMC vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF (USMC) is 2.49%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.15%. This indicates that USMC 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

	USMC	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.49%	9.15%	-6.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.69%	23.00%	-14.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.81%	28.27%	-16.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.36%	28.91%	-12.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.25%	30.73%	-12.48%

USMC vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

USMC has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

USMC vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

USMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.74%, 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%
USMC Principal U.S. Mega-Cap ETF	0.74%	0.79%	1.04%	1.35%	1.78%	1.53%	1.55%	2.01%	2.28%	0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both USMC and IQM in my portfolio?

USMC and IQM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, USMC or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.15%) compared to USMC (2.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USMC dropped -29.97% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, USMC or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.83% vs 15.68% for USMC. On fees, USMC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, USMC has been the lower-risk option at 2.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, USMC or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.83% return vs 15.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, USMC or IQM?

USMC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IQM.

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

USMC has the higher dividend yield at 0.74%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.

What is the main difference between USMC and IQM?

They also come from different issuers: Principal and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for USMC and 0.50% for IQM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 2.10), 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.