PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMCB vs. JPUS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMCB vs. JPUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF (JPUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCB achieves a 12.99% return, which is significantly higher than JPUS's 10.87% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IMCB having a 11.18% annualized return and JPUS not far ahead at 11.36%.


IMCB

1D
0.09%
1M
2.56%
YTD
12.99%
6M
13.23%
1Y
20.86%
3Y*
16.89%
5Y*
8.49%
10Y*
11.18%

JPUS

1D
-0.29%
1M
0.86%
YTD
10.87%
6M
11.70%
1Y
19.87%
3Y*
15.41%
5Y*
9.35%
10Y*
11.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMCB vs. JPUS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
12.99%10.25%15.10%16.37%-16.09%22.81%13.35%31.49%-11.53%19.70%
JPUS
JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF
10.87%11.18%13.48%10.98%-8.47%29.09%7.54%25.50%-6.14%20.58%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCB and JPUS is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.89

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

0.93

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

0.94

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2015

0.90

The correlation between IMCB and JPUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCB vs. JPUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMCB
JPUS

Technology

21.8%
11.6%

Industrials

19.1%
10.4%

Financial Services

11.7%
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.0%
8.6%

Healthcare

7.9%
11.5%

Energy

7.0%
7.3%

Utilities

6.1%
9.5%

Basic Materials

5.5%
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.2%
11.3%

Real Estate

4.2%
10.5%

Communication Services

2.3%
4.5%

Technology

IMCB
21.8%
JPUS
11.6%

Industrials

IMCB
19.1%
JPUS
10.4%

Financial Services

IMCB
11.7%
JPUS
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCB
9.0%
JPUS
8.6%

Healthcare

IMCB
7.9%
JPUS
11.5%

Energy

IMCB
7.0%
JPUS
7.3%

Utilities

IMCB
6.1%
JPUS
9.5%

Basic Materials

IMCB
5.5%
JPUS
6.8%

Consumer Defensive

IMCB
5.2%
JPUS
11.3%

Real Estate

IMCB
4.2%
JPUS
10.5%

Communication Services

IMCB
2.3%
JPUS
4.5%

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

IMCB vs. JPUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCB
IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

JPUS
JPUS Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
JPUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JPUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
JPUS Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
JPUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
JPUS Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
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.

IMCB vs. JPUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF (JPUS). 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.


IMCBJPUSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.33

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

2.89

-0.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.27

11.60

-1.33

IMCB vs. JPUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the JPUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCB and JPUS, 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


IMCBJPUSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.62

1.92

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

0.65

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

0.68

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.72

-0.22

Drawdowns

IMCB vs. JPUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCB drawdown since its inception was -58.80%, which is greater than JPUS's maximum drawdown of -38.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCB and JPUS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMCBJPUSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.80%

-38.69%

-20.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.05%

-6.90%

-1.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.80%

-15.96%

-3.84%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.15%

-19.04%

-6.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.99%

-38.69%

-2.30%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.19%

-1.02%

-1.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.73%

-3.82%

-3.91%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

1.72%

+0.32%

Volatility

IMCB vs. JPUS - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) has a higher volatility of 3.73% compared to JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF (JPUS) at 2.55%. This indicates that IMCB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JPUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMCBJPUSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.73%

2.55%

+1.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.87%

7.61%

+2.26%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.96%

10.40%

+2.56%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.60%

14.51%

+3.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.67%

16.76%

+2.91%

IMCB vs. JPUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCB has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than JPUS's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IMCB vs. JPUS - Dividend Comparison

IMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than JPUS's 2.06% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
1.23%1.42%1.43%1.55%1.70%1.08%1.12%1.32%1.80%1.31%1.79%1.47%
JPUS
JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF
2.06%2.27%2.12%2.26%2.35%1.67%1.94%2.09%2.16%1.25%0.77%0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMCB and JPUS have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IMCB has higher volatility (3.73%) compared to JPUS (2.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCB dropped -58.80% vs JPUS's -38.69%.

On 10-year performance, JPUS leads with 11.36% vs 11.18% for IMCB. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, JPUS has been the lower-risk option at 2.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, JPUS has performed better with a 11.36% return vs 11.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for JPUS.

JPUS has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 1.23% for IMCB.

IMCB is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while JPUS is Large Cap Blend Equities. IMCB tracks IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index, while JPUS tracks JPMorgan Diversified Factor US Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for IMCB and 0.18% for JPUS.

JPUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.62), 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 IMCB and JPUS

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