JGLO vs. PID

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

JGLO (Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF) and PID (Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF) are both Global Equities funds. JGLO is actively managed, while PID is passively managed. Over the past year, JGLO returned 13.14% vs 14.07% for PID. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JGLO charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for PID.

Performance

JGLO vs. PID - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF (JGLO) and Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JGLO achieves a 3.31% return, which is significantly higher than PID's 3.12% return.

JGLO

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: -1.33%
• YTD: 3.31%
• 6M: 2.82%
• 1Y: 13.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PID

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: -2.75%
• YTD: 3.12%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 14.07%
• 3Y*: 12.22%
• 5Y*: 8.28%
• 10Y*: 8.94%

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

JGLO vs. PID - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JGLO Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF	3.31%	14.07%	17.00%	8.01%
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF	3.12%	24.45%	3.08%	6.17%

Correlation

The correlation between JGLO and PID is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 14, 2023	0.64

The correlation between JGLO and PID has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

JGLO vs. PID - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JGLO	PID
Technology	31.6%	9.1%
Financial Services	17.3%	17.5%
Consumer Cyclical	16.1%	6.2%
Healthcare	8.6%	8.6%
Communication Services	8.2%	13.7%
Industrials	7.8%	7.5%
Energy	3.9%	12.5%
Utilities	2.2%	15.1%
Basic Materials	1.6%	3.3%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	6.2%

Return for Risk

JGLO vs. PID — Risk / Return Rank

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

JGLO

JGLO Risk / Return Rank: 32
JGLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
JGLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
JGLO Omega Ratio Rank: 30
JGLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
JGLO Martin Ratio Rank: 38

PID

PID Risk / Return Rank: 42
PID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
PID Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
PID Omega Ratio Rank: 41
PID Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
PID Martin Ratio Rank: 41

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.

JGLO vs. PID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF (JGLO) and Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID). 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.

	JGLO	PID	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	1.44	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.56	2.13	-0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.26	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	1.89	-0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.59	6.22	-0.63

JGLO vs. PID - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JGLO Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is comparable to the PID Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JGLO and PID, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

JGLO vs. PID - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JGLO drawdown since its inception was -16.12%, smaller than the maximum PID drawdown of -66.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JGLO and PID.

Drawdown Indicators

	JGLO	PID	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.12%	-66.34%	+50.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.47%	-7.47%	-2.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.34%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.97%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.43%	-4.35%	+1.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.88%	-13.01%	+11.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	2.27%	+0.08%

Volatility

JGLO vs. PID - Volatility Comparison

Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF (JGLO) has a higher volatility of 4.77% compared to Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF (PID) at 2.68%. This indicates that JGLO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JGLO	PID	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.77%	2.68%	+2.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.99%	7.86%	+2.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.24%	9.83%	+2.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.17%	13.96%	+0.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.17%	17.67%	-3.50%

JGLO vs. PID - Expense Ratio Comparison

JGLO has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than PID's 0.56% expense ratio.

Dividends

JGLO vs. PID - Dividend Comparison

JGLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, less than PID's 3.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JGLO Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF	1.16%	1.20%	2.00%	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PID Invesco International Dividend Achievers™ ETF	3.61%	3.28%	3.88%	3.31%	3.30%	3.30%	3.16%	3.99%	3.87%	3.46%	3.90%	4.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JGLO and PID in my portfolio?

JGLO and PID have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JGLO or PID?

JGLO has higher volatility (4.77%) compared to PID (2.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JGLO dropped -16.12% vs PID's -66.34%.

Which ETF is better, JGLO or PID?

On 1-year performance, PID leads with 14.07% vs 13.14% for JGLO. On fees, JGLO is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, PID has been the lower-risk option at 2.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JGLO or PID?

Over the 1-year period, PID has performed better with a 14.07% return vs 13.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JGLO or PID?

JGLO is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for PID.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JGLO or PID?

PID has the higher dividend yield at 3.61%, compared with 1.16% for JGLO.

What is the main difference between JGLO and PID?

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for JGLO and 0.56% for PID.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.08), 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.