JAMVX vs. JGLTX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JAMVX (Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio) and JGLTX (Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio) are both mutual funds - JAMVX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund managed by Janus Henderson, while JGLTX is a Technology Equities fund managed by Janus Henderson. Over the past 10 years, JAMVX returned 9.09%/yr vs 24.87%/yr for JGLTX. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JAMVX charges 0.67%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for JGLTX.

Performance

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio (JAMVX) and Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio (JGLTX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JAMVX achieves a 11.09% return, which is significantly lower than JGLTX's 35.13% return. Over the past 10 years, JAMVX has underperformed JGLTX with an annualized return of 9.09%, while JGLTX has yielded a comparatively higher 24.87% annualized return.

JAMVX

• 1D: 1.13%
• 1M: 0.71%
• YTD: 11.09%
• 6M: 11.39%
• 1Y: 20.11%
• 3Y*: 14.45%
• 5Y*: 7.67%
• 10Y*: 9.09%

JGLTX

• 1D: 0.97%
• 1M: 18.11%
• YTD: 35.13%
• 6M: 35.19%
• 1Y: 60.36%
• 3Y*: 37.03%
• 5Y*: 19.79%
• 10Y*: 24.87%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
JAMVX Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio	11.09%	6.55%	13.06%	11.41%	-5.51%	19.72%	-1.08%	30.39%	-13.59%	13.98%
JGLTX Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio	35.13%	25.19%	32.10%	54.55%	-36.42%	18.28%	50.42%	45.29%	1.17%	45.17%

Correlation

The correlation between JAMVX and JGLTX is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.44
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 1, 2000	0.73

Over the past year, the correlation between JAMVX and JGLTX has dropped to 0.31 - well below their long-term average of 0.73, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

JAMVX vs. JGLTX — Risk / Return Rank

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

JAMVX

JAMVX Risk / Return Rank: 35
JAMVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
JAMVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
JAMVX Omega Ratio Rank: 28
JAMVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
JAMVX Martin Ratio Rank: 43

JGLTX

JGLTX Risk / Return Rank: 80
JGLTX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
JGLTX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
JGLTX Omega Ratio Rank: 76
JGLTX Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
JGLTX Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio (JAMVX) and Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio (JGLTX). 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.

	JAMVX	JGLTX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	3.02	-1.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.38	3.71	-1.33
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.49	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.47	3.92	-1.45
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.20	13.43	-4.23
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JAMVX Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is lower than the JGLTX Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JAMVX and JGLTX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JAMVX	JGLTX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.61	3.02	-1.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	0.76	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	1.02	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.48	0.36	+0.12

Drawdowns

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JAMVX drawdown since its inception was -46.19%, smaller than the maximum JGLTX drawdown of -81.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JAMVX and JGLTX.

Drawdown Indicators

	JAMVX	JGLTX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.19%	-81.78%	+35.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.61%	-15.81%	+7.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.83%	-23.72%	+3.89%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.83%	-45.18%	+25.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.82%	-45.18%	+5.36%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	0.00%	-1.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.58%	-36.60%	+30.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.30%	4.60%	-2.30%

Volatility

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio (JAMVX) is 3.67%, while Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio (JGLTX) has a volatility of 6.73%. This indicates that JAMVX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JGLTX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JAMVX	JGLTX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.67%	6.73%	-3.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.61%	16.85%	-7.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.20%	20.49%	-7.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.45%	26.10%	-9.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.95%	24.49%	-6.54%

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Expense Ratio Comparison

JAMVX has a 0.67% expense ratio, which is lower than JGLTX's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

JAMVX vs. JGLTX - Dividend Comparison

JAMVX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.77%, more than JGLTX's 6.64% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JAMVX Janus Henderson VIT Mid Cap Value Portfolio	9.77%	10.85%	6.16%	3.67%	9.77%	0.43%	2.85%	8.72%	12.17%	4.32%	14.88%	12.31%
JGLTX Janus Henderson VIT Global Technology and Innovation Portfolio	6.64%	8.98%	0.00%	0.00%	26.96%	14.48%	7.71%	6.81%	4.95%	5.68%	3.71%	16.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JAMVX and JGLTX in my portfolio?

JAMVX and JGLTX have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JAMVX or JGLTX?

JGLTX has higher volatility (6.73%) compared to JAMVX (3.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JAMVX dropped -46.19% vs JGLTX's -81.78%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JGLTX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 1.61), 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.