BNDS vs. JHCP

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BNDS (Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF) and JHCP (John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BNDS returned 13.48% vs 6.30% for JHCP. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BNDS charges 0.81%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for JHCP.

Performance

BNDS vs. JHCP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) and John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNDS achieves a 4.44% return, which is significantly higher than JHCP's 0.53% return.

BNDS

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: 4.44%
• 6M: 4.74%
• 1Y: 13.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JHCP

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.13%
• YTD: 0.53%
• 6M: 0.57%
• 1Y: 6.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BNDS vs. JHCP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	4.44%	8.30%
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF	0.53%	7.95%

Correlation

The correlation between BNDS and JHCP is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2025	0.44

Return for Risk

BNDS vs. JHCP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNDS

BNDS Risk / Return Rank: 89
BNDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
BNDS Omega Ratio Rank: 96
BNDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
BNDS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

JHCP

JHCP Risk / Return Rank: 41
JHCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
JHCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
JHCP Omega Ratio Rank: 38
JHCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
JHCP Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

BNDS vs. JHCP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) and John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP). 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.

	BNDS	JHCP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.82	1.48	+2.34
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	5.66	2.20	+3.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.82	1.25	+0.57
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.88	2.16	+1.71
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.93	6.24	+11.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BNDS vs. JHCP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNDS Sharpe Ratio is 3.82, which is higher than the JHCP Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNDS and JHCP, 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

	BNDS	JHCP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.82	1.48	+2.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.78	1.12	+0.66

Drawdowns

BNDS vs. JHCP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNDS drawdown since its inception was -6.96%, which is greater than JHCP's maximum drawdown of -3.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNDS and JHCP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNDS	JHCP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.96%	-3.06%	-3.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.45%	-2.82%	-0.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-1.37%	+1.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.82%	-0.80%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.75%	0.98%	-0.23%

Volatility

BNDS vs. JHCP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) is 0.86%, while John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) has a volatility of 1.35%. This indicates that BNDS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JHCP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNDS	JHCP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.86%	1.35%	-0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.74%	3.07%	-0.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.55%	4.27%	-0.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.29%	4.84%	+0.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.29%	4.84%	+0.45%

BNDS vs. JHCP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BNDS has a 0.81% expense ratio, which is higher than JHCP's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

BNDS vs. JHCP - Dividend Comparison

BNDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.96%, more than JHCP's 4.65% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	7.96%	7.98%	0.00%
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF	4.65%	4.79%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNDS and JHCP in my portfolio?

BNDS and JHCP have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BNDS or JHCP?

JHCP has higher volatility (1.35%) compared to BNDS (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNDS dropped -6.96% vs JHCP's -3.06%.

Which ETF is better, BNDS or JHCP?

On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 13.48% vs 6.30% for JHCP. On fees, JHCP is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, BNDS has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BNDS or JHCP?

Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 13.48% return vs 6.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNDS or JHCP?

JHCP is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BNDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BNDS or JHCP?

BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.96%, compared with 4.65% for JHCP.

What is the main difference between BNDS and JHCP?

They also come from different issuers: InfraCap and John Hancock. Their fees differ too: 0.81% for BNDS and 0.36% for JHCP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.82 vs 1.48), 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.