COWG vs. JHMM
COWG (Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and JHMM (John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - COWG tracks the Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index while JHMM tracks the John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, COWG returned 24.53%/yr vs 17.01%/yr for JHMM. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. COWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for JHMM.
Performance
COWG vs. JHMM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with COWG having a 12.50% return and JHMM slightly higher at 12.60%.
COWG
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 8.17%
- YTD
- 12.50%
- 6M
- 12.76%
- 1Y
- 13.36%
- 3Y*
- 24.53%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JHMM
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 3.21%
- YTD
- 12.60%
- 6M
- 13.14%
- 1Y
- 24.83%
- 3Y*
- 17.01%
- 5Y*
- 8.39%
- 10Y*
- 11.88%
COWG vs. JHMM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 12.50% | 10.24% | 34.99% | 20.69% | -0.68% |
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF | 12.60% | 10.73% | 14.61% | 14.53% | 0.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between COWG and JHMM is 0.75, 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 | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2022 | 0.80 |
The correlation between COWG and JHMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
COWG vs. JHMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
COWG
JHMM
Technology
Healthcare
Energy
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
COWG
JHMM
Healthcare
COWG
JHMM
Energy
COWG
JHMM
Basic Materials
COWG
JHMM
Communication Services
COWG
JHMM
Industrials
COWG
JHMM
Consumer Cyclical
COWG
JHMM
Consumer Defensive
COWG
JHMM
Utilities
COWG
JHMM
Financial Services
COWG
-
JHMM
Real Estate
COWG
-
JHMM
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
COWG vs. JHMM — Risk / Return Rank
COWG
JHMM
COWG vs. JHMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM). 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.
| COWG | JHMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.31 | -0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.24 | 2.89 | -1.64 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.64 | 11.17 | -7.52 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| COWG | JHMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.84 | 1.77 | -0.93 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.46 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.61 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.18 | 0.63 | +0.55 |
Drawdowns
COWG vs. JHMM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum COWG drawdown since its inception was -23.60%, smaller than the maximum JHMM drawdown of -40.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COWG and JHMM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| COWG | JHMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.60% | -40.71% | +17.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.79% | -8.64% | -2.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.60% | -21.88% | -1.72% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.10% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.71% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.24% | +0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.28% | -5.43% | +2.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.67% | 2.23% | +1.44% |
Volatility
COWG vs. JHMM - Volatility Comparison
Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (COWG) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) have volatilities of 3.67% and 3.81%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| COWG | JHMM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.67% | 3.81% | -0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.01% | 10.47% | +1.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.96% | 14.12% | +1.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.11% | 18.32% | +0.79% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.11% | 19.60% | -0.49% |
COWG vs. JHMM - Expense Ratio Comparison
COWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than JHMM's 0.42% expense ratio.
Dividends
COWG vs. JHMM - Dividend Comparison
COWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than JHMM's 0.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COWG Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF | 0.30% | 0.32% | 0.40% | 0.47% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF | 0.87% | 0.98% | 1.01% | 1.17% | 1.16% | 0.72% | 1.04% | 1.02% | 1.36% | 0.90% | 1.15% | 0.33% |
Frequently Asked Questions
COWG and JHMM have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
JHMM has higher volatility (3.81%) compared to COWG (3.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COWG dropped -23.60% vs JHMM's -40.71%.
On 3-year performance, COWG leads with 24.53% vs 17.01% for JHMM. On fees, JHMM is cheaper at 0.42% per year. On volatility, COWG has been the lower-risk option at 3.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, COWG has performed better with a 24.53% return vs 17.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
JHMM is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for COWG.
JHMM has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.30% for COWG.
COWG tracks Pacer US Large Cap Cash Cows Growth Leaders Index, while JHMM tracks John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Manulife. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for COWG and 0.42% for JHMM.
JHMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 0.84), 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.
Find the right allocation for COWG and JHMM
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