XDAT vs. IQM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XDAT (Franklin Exponential Data ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XDAT is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton, while IQM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Franklin Templeton. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, XDAT returned 1.26%/yr vs 22.22%/yr for IQM. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

XDAT vs. IQM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Exponential Data ETF (XDAT) 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, XDAT achieves a 0.92% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% return.

XDAT

• 1D: -3.31%
• 1M: 10.82%
• YTD: 0.92%
• 6M: -1.59%
• 1Y: -1.19%
• 3Y*: 12.16%
• 5Y*: 1.26%
• 10Y*: —

IQM

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 11.94%
• YTD: 40.18%
• 6M: 38.57%
• 1Y: 75.07%
• 3Y*: 37.62%
• 5Y*: 22.22%
• 10Y*: —

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

XDAT vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XDAT Franklin Exponential Data ETF	0.92%	1.87%	16.54%	45.77%	-45.71%	10.86%
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF	40.18%	30.76%	31.03%	41.06%	-33.36%	16.54%

Correlation

The correlation between XDAT and IQM is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2021	0.79

Over the past year, the correlation between XDAT and IQM has dropped to 0.57 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XDAT vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XDAT	IQM
Technology	53.3%	65.9%
Communication Services	35.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	5.7%	-
Financial Services	4.1%	-
Healthcare	2.6%	1.1%
Consumer Cyclical	1.3%	4.1%
Industrials	0.5%	19.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	2.7%
Utilities	-	3.3%

Return for Risk

XDAT vs. IQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

XDAT

XDAT Risk / Return Rank: 8
XDAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
XDAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
XDAT Omega Ratio Rank: 8
XDAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
XDAT Martin Ratio Rank: 8

IQM

IQM Risk / Return Rank: 78
IQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IQM Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
IQM Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

XDAT vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Exponential Data ETF (XDAT) 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.

	XDAT	IQM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.05	2.67	-2.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.09	3.11	-3.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.01	1.43	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.04	5.13	-5.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.09	16.79	-16.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XDAT vs. IQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XDAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.05, which is lower than the IQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XDAT 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

	XDAT	IQM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.05	2.67	-2.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04	0.77	-0.73
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.03	0.96	-0.93

Drawdowns

XDAT vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XDAT drawdown since its inception was -54.87%, which is greater than IQM's maximum drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XDAT and IQM.

Drawdown Indicators

	XDAT	IQM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.87%	-44.91%	-9.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.56%	-14.71%	-14.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.56%	-30.42%	+0.86%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-54.87%	-44.91%	-9.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-15.57%	-0.37%	-15.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.91%	-12.25%	-13.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.78%	4.49%	+9.29%

Volatility

XDAT vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Exponential Data ETF (XDAT) is 8.56%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that XDAT 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

	XDAT	IQM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.56%	9.20%	-0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.27%	22.92%	-3.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.56%	28.27%	-4.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.45%	28.91%	+0.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.43%	30.72%	-1.29%

XDAT vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

XDAT vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison

Neither XDAT nor IQM has 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%
XDAT Franklin Exponential Data ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XDAT and IQM in my portfolio?

XDAT and IQM have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XDAT or IQM?

IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to XDAT (8.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XDAT dropped -54.87% vs IQM's -44.91%.

Which ETF is better, XDAT or IQM?

On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 1.26% for XDAT. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, XDAT has been the lower-risk option at 8.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XDAT or IQM?

Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 1.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XDAT or IQM?

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

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

XDAT and IQM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between XDAT and IQM?

XDAT is categorized as Technology Equities, while IQM is Large Cap Growth Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs -0.05), 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.