PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IWR vs. JHMM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IWR vs. JHMM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) and JHMM (John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - IWR tracks the Russell Midcap Index while JHMM tracks the John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IWR returned 11.55%/yr vs 11.84%/yr for JHMM. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IWR charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for JHMM.

Performance

IWR vs. JHMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IWR having a 13.02% return and JHMM slightly higher at 13.19%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IWR having a 11.55% annualized return and JHMM not far ahead at 11.84%.

IWR

1D
0.52%
1M
3.28%
YTD
13.02%
6M
12.45%
1Y
22.54%
3Y*
17.59%
5Y*
8.11%
10Y*
11.55%

JHMM

1D
0.53%
1M
2.63%
YTD
13.19%
6M
13.16%
1Y
25.74%
3Y*
17.47%
5Y*
8.51%
10Y*
11.84%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWR vs. JHMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		13.02%10.37%15.21%17.05%-17.48%22.44%16.93%30.23%-9.10%18.25%
JHMM
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF		13.19%10.73%14.61%14.53%-15.30%24.54%16.22%30.01%-9.57%19.96%

Correlation

The correlation between IWR and JHMM is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

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

0.99

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

0.99

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

0.99

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

0.99

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2015

0.98

The correlation between IWR and JHMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWR vs. JHMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IWR
JHMM

Industrials

18.4%
19.4%

Technology

17.2%
17.2%

Financial Services

12.5%
15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

11.2%
11.0%

Healthcare

8.7%
10.2%

Energy

7.2%
5.4%

Real Estate

7.0%
5.4%

Utilities

6.1%
5.4%

Basic Materials

4.3%
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
3.7%

Communication Services

3.4%
2.7%

Industrials

IWR
18.4%
JHMM
19.4%

Technology

IWR
17.2%
JHMM
17.2%

Financial Services

IWR
12.5%
JHMM
15.3%

Consumer Cyclical

IWR
11.2%
JHMM
11.0%

Healthcare

IWR
8.7%
JHMM
10.2%

Energy

IWR
7.2%
JHMM
5.4%

Real Estate

IWR
7.0%
JHMM
5.4%

Utilities

IWR
6.1%
JHMM
5.4%

Basic Materials

IWR
4.3%
JHMM
4.2%

Consumer Defensive

IWR
4.1%
JHMM
3.7%

Communication Services

IWR
3.4%
JHMM
2.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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

iShares Russell Midcap ETF

John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF

Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. SCHMIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGL
Often compared with JHMM:
JHMM vs. XMHQJHMM vs. OTCAXJHMM vs. VOEJHMM vs. JPMEJHMM vs. IJHJHMM vs. IMCGJHMM vs. VOO

Return for Risk

IWR vs. JHMM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
JHMM
JHMM Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
JHMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHMM Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
JHMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHMM Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

IWR vs. JHMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) 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.

IWRJHMMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.69
1.84

-0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.44
2.63

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.32

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.77

2.99

-0.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.70

11.58

-0.88

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

IWR vs. JHMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the JHMM Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWR and JHMM, 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

IWRJHMMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.69

1.84

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.47

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.60

0.61

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.63

-0.14

Drawdowns

IWR vs. JHMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWR drawdown since its inception was -58.78%, which is greater than JHMM's maximum drawdown of -40.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWR and JHMM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IWRJHMMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.78%

-40.71%

-18.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-8.64%

+0.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.09%

-21.88%

+0.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.18%

-24.10%

-2.08%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.59%

-40.71%

+0.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.80%

-5.43%

-2.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

2.23%

-0.12%

Volatility

IWR vs. JHMM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR) is 3.16%, while John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) has a volatility of 3.71%. This indicates that IWR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JHMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IWRJHMMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.16%

3.71%

-0.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

10.47%

-0.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.36%

14.09%

-0.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.22%

18.32%

-0.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.36%

19.60%

-0.24%

IWR vs. JHMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWR has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than JHMM's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWR vs. JHMM - Dividend Comparison

IWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.14%, more than JHMM's 0.86% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.14%1.29%1.27%1.43%1.59%1.04%1.28%1.43%1.98%1.52%1.72%1.59%
JHMM
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF		0.86%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

With a correlation of 0.99, IWR and JHMM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

JHMM has higher volatility (3.71%) compared to IWR (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWR dropped -58.78% vs JHMM's -40.71%.

On 10-year performance, JHMM leads with 11.84% vs 11.55% for IWR. On fees, IWR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IWR has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, JHMM has performed better with a 11.84% return vs 11.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IWR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for JHMM.

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.14%, compared with 0.86% for JHMM.

IWR tracks Russell Midcap Index, while JHMM tracks John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Manulife. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for IWR and 0.42% for JHMM.

JHMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.69), 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 IWR 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