PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HFQAX vs. MCSFX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX) and MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with HFQAX having a 11.97% return and MCSFX slightly lower at 11.94%.


HFQAX

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.62%
YTD
11.97%
6M
12.27%
1Y
24.45%
3Y*
18.02%
5Y*
10.48%
10Y*
9.15%

MCSFX

1D
-1.47%
1M
-9.23%
YTD
11.94%
6M
10.41%
1Y
23.73%
3Y*
11.27%
5Y*
8.73%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
HFQAX
Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund
11.97%29.61%6.86%10.17%-6.59%12.45%1.66%8.57%
MCSFX
MFS Commodity Strategy Fund
11.94%17.09%4.32%-7.25%12.27%26.40%-1.34%-1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between HFQAX and MCSFX is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.11

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.22

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2019

0.30

The correlation between HFQAX and MCSFX shifts across timeframes, from 0.11 (1 year) to 0.30 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

HFQAX vs. MCSFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

HFQAX
HFQAX Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
HFQAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HFQAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
HFQAX Omega Ratio Rank: 7272
Omega Ratio Rank
HFQAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
HFQAX Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank

MCSFX
MCSFX Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
MCSFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCSFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCSFX Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
MCSFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCSFX Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
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.

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX) and MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


HFQAXMCSFXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.27

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.42

1.84

+0.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.62

8.01

+0.62

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HFQAX Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is higher than the MCSFX Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HFQAX and MCSFX, 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...

Drawdowns

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HFQAX drawdown since its inception was -52.77%, which is greater than MCSFX's maximum drawdown of -37.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HFQAX and MCSFX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HFQAXMCSFXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.77%

-37.16%

-15.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.99%

-12.77%

+2.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.20%

-12.77%

+0.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.83%

-37.16%

+15.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.83%

-12.77%

+10.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.84%

-18.19%

+7.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.80%

2.93%

-0.13%

Volatility

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Volatility Comparison

Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) at 3.57%. This indicates that HFQAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCSFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HFQAXMCSFXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

3.57%

+0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.94%

13.93%

-3.99%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.73%

16.01%

-4.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.07%

34.14%

-21.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.51%

29.47%

-14.96%

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

HFQAX has a 1.24% expense ratio, which is lower than MCSFX's 1.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

HFQAX vs. MCSFX - Dividend Comparison

HFQAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.96%, less than MCSFX's 13.44% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HFQAX
Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund
5.96%6.59%7.96%7.89%8.02%6.92%7.25%6.80%7.66%6.03%6.77%6.60%
MCSFX
MFS Commodity Strategy Fund
13.44%15.05%2.25%1.04%26.24%54.80%0.15%0.86%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


HFQAX and MCSFX have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

HFQAX has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to MCSFX (3.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HFQAX dropped -52.77% vs MCSFX's -37.16%.

HFQAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HFQAX and MCSFX

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