IQM vs LRGE
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF vs ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF
Which is better, IQM or LRGE?
Each has led over a different period.
LRGE has a lower expense ratio. IQM led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, LRGE over 1Y. IQM is less concentrated, with 43.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IQM | LRGE |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.48%Best |
| AUM | $86M | $395M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.12% |
| Holdings | 83 | 65 |
| YTD Return | +4.39%Best | +3.85% |
| 1Y Return | -1.27% | +0.47%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +30.54%Best | +18.44% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.17%Best | +7.91% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 29.1% | 19.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.9% | -37.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,980Best | $14,632 |
| Top 10 Weight | 43.7%Best | 60.0% |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Feb 25, 2020 | May 22, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 27, 2020 to Oct 30, 2026 (6.7 years).
IQM vs LRGE growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 6.7 years both funds cover.
IQM vs LRGE Performance
Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and ClearBridge Large Cap Growth ESG ETF (LRGE) is an ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year IQM returned -1.27% while LRGE returned +0.47%. Year to date, IQM is up 4.39% versus a gain of 3.85% for LRGE.
Over three years, IQM compounded at +30.54% per year against +18.44% for LRGE; over five years the annualized figures are +11.17% and +7.91% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, IQM has the edge at +22.31% annualized vs +14.43%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IQM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.1% compared with 19.2% for LRGE. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -44.9% for IQM and -37.0% for LRGE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IQM charges 0.50% per year while LRGE charges 0.48%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $48 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IQM currently yields 0.00% against 0.12% for LRGE.
Holdings Overlap
27.6% of IQM's money is in holdings LRGE also owns. 44.8% of LRGE's money is in holdings IQM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
10 positions in common, counted across the 81 positions we hold weights for in IQM and 32 in LRGE, against full books of 83 and 65.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 21 positions for LRGE that do not appear in our book for IQM (54.4% of the fund), and 50 for IQM that do not appear in LRGE (54.4%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IQM | Weight in LRGE | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.92% | 16.99% | 9.07% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 3.76% | 6.37% | 2.61% |
| 2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 6.16% | 3.13% | 3.03% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock | 2.64% | 3.50% | 0.86% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.88% | 3.46% | 1.58% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 1.08% | 4.17% | 3.09% |
| ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares | 1.73% | 3.13% | 1.40% |
| VRTVertiv Holdings Co | 1.27% | 1.48% | 0.21% |
| ISRGIntuitive Surgical Inc. | 0.44% | 2.05% | 1.61% |
| CIENCiena Corp | 0.68% | 0.51% | 0.17% |
44.8% of LRGE is already inside IQM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IQM or LRGE?
IQM has an expense ratio of 0.50% while LRGE charges 0.48%. LRGE is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IQM or LRGE?
Over the past year IQM returned -1.27% vs +0.47% for LRGE, so LRGE leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IQM annualized +22.31% vs +14.43% for LRGE. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IQM or LRGE?
IQM has been the more volatile fund at 29.1% annualized versus 19.2% for LRGE. Worst drawdown: IQM -44.9% vs LRGE -37.0%.
Should I hold both IQM and LRGE?
IQM and LRGE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IQM and LRGE?
44.8% of LRGE's money is in holdings IQM also owns. 44.8% of LRGE's is in holdings IQM also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 81 positions we hold weights for in IQM and 32 in LRGE.
Which pays a higher dividend, IQM or LRGE?
IQM yields 0.00% while LRGE yields 0.12%, so LRGE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LRGE better than IQM?
LRGE has a lower expense ratio. IQM led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, LRGE over 1Y. IQM is less concentrated, with 43.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.