PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
CLU.NEO vs. JHAC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CLU.NEO (iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class) and JHAC (John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CLU.NEO is passively managed, while JHAC is actively managed. Over the past year, CLU.NEO returned 24.65% vs 11.34% for JHAC. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.72% expense ratio.

Performance

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) and John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

CLU.NEO is traded in CAD, while JHAC is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the JHAC values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLU.NEO achieves a 8.69% return, which is significantly higher than JHAC's 1.91% return.

CLU.NEO

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.57%
YTD
8.69%
6M
10.48%
1Y
24.65%
3Y*
16.95%
5Y*
9.30%
10Y*
11.02%

JHAC

1D
0.88%
1M
3.16%
YTD
1.91%
6M
-2.26%
1Y
11.34%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
CLU.NEO
iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class		8.69%15.20%14.82%10.67%
JHAC
John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF		1.91%-1.41%34.27%11.26%

Correlation

The correlation between CLU.NEO and JHAC is 0.53, 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

0.53

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2023

0.55

The correlation between CLU.NEO and JHAC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class

John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF

Often compared with CLU.NEO:
CLU.NEO vs. FLCCCLU.NEO vs. IUSCLU.NEO vs. RDVYCLU.NEO vs. BCUSCLU.NEO vs. KATCLU.NEO vs. DFNDCLU.NEO vs. FEAC
Often compared with JHAC:
JHAC vs. ONEQJHAC vs. EDVJHAC vs. AVGEJHAC vs. BDGSJHAC vs. MIDJHAC vs. SPLVJHAC vs. JPLD

Return for Risk

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
CLU.NEO
CLU.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
CLU.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLU.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLU.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
CLU.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLU.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
JHAC
JHAC Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
JHAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHAC Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
JHAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHAC Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) and John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC). 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.

CLU.NEOJHACDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.50
0.87

+1.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.77
1.23

+2.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

1.16

+0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.86

0.73

+3.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.84

1.95

+12.89

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLU.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is higher than the JHAC Sharpe Ratio of 0.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLU.NEO and JHAC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

CLU.NEOJHACDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.50

0.87

+1.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

1.02

-0.40

Drawdowns

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLU.NEO drawdown since its inception was -39.93%, which is greater than JHAC's maximum drawdown of -24.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLU.NEO and JHAC.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

CLU.NEOJHACDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.93%

-24.31%

-15.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.55%

-15.54%

+8.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.57%

—

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.66%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.93%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.70%

-3.63%

+2.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.74%

-4.58%

-0.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.70%

5.83%

-4.13%

Volatility

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class (CLU.NEO) is 2.30%, while John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC) has a volatility of 3.03%. This indicates that CLU.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JHAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

CLU.NEOJHACDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.30%

3.03%

-0.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.24%

9.73%

-2.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.11%

13.13%

-3.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.54%

16.84%

-2.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.08%

16.84%

+1.24%

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CLU.NEO and JHAC have an expense ratio of 0.72%.

Dividends

CLU.NEO vs. JHAC - Dividend Comparison

CLU.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, more than JHAC's 0.57% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CLU.NEO
iShares US Fundamental Index ETF (CAD-Hedged) Common Class		1.20%1.31%1.32%1.35%1.63%1.19%1.66%1.46%1.77%1.46%1.63%1.87%
JHAC
John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF		0.57%0.58%0.66%0.17%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

CLU.NEO and JHAC have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Both ETFs have the same 0.72% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CLU.NEO and JHAC have the same expense ratio: 0.72% per year.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and John Hancock.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CLU.NEO and JHAC

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