JHAC vs. ONEQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

JHAC (John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF) and ONEQ (Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JHAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by John Hancock, while ONEQ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite Index. JHAC is actively managed, while ONEQ is passively managed. Over the past year, JHAC returned 2.96% vs 31.59% for ONEQ. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JHAC charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for ONEQ.

Performance

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHAC achieves a -4.18% return, which is significantly lower than ONEQ's 10.75% return.

JHAC

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: -3.16%
• YTD: -4.18%
• 6M: -6.35%
• 1Y: 2.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ONEQ

• 1D: -2.25%
• 1M: -2.78%
• YTD: 10.75%
• 6M: 9.24%
• 1Y: 31.59%
• 3Y*: 24.80%
• 5Y*: 13.39%
• 10Y*: 19.63%

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

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JHAC John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF	-4.18%	3.33%	23.65%	15.81%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	10.75%	20.89%	29.30%	15.42%

Correlation

The correlation between JHAC and ONEQ is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2023	0.81

The correlation between JHAC and ONEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JHAC	ONEQ
Technology	27.5%	54.3%
Consumer Cyclical	23.9%	12.7%
Financial Services	15.9%	2.9%
Communication Services	8.9%	15.4%
Industrials	6.5%	2.9%
Healthcare	6.3%	4.7%
Energy	4.9%	0.5%
Real Estate	3.5%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	4.4%
Basic Materials	1.1%	0.9%
Utilities	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

JHAC vs. ONEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

JHAC

JHAC Risk / Return Rank: 11
JHAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
JHAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
JHAC Omega Ratio Rank: 11
JHAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
JHAC Martin Ratio Rank: 11

ONEQ

ONEQ Risk / Return Rank: 54
ONEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
ONEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
ONEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ONEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
ONEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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.

	JHAC	ONEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.22	1.83	-1.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.39	2.44	-2.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.32	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.20	2.51	-2.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.59	9.53	-8.94

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHAC Sharpe Ratio is 0.22, which is lower than the ONEQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHAC and ONEQ, 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

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHAC drawdown since its inception was -24.43%, smaller than the maximum ONEQ drawdown of -55.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHAC and ONEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	JHAC	ONEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.43%	-55.09%	+30.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.24%	-12.64%	-2.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.09%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.23%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.74%	-5.46%	-2.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.94%	-7.94%	+4.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.03%	3.32%	+1.71%

Volatility

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF (JHAC) is 4.04%, while Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a volatility of 7.59%. This indicates that JHAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ONEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JHAC	ONEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	7.59%	-3.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	13.69%	-3.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.49%	17.41%	-3.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.41%	22.36%	-4.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.41%	21.79%	-4.38%

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHAC has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than ONEQ's 0.21% expense ratio.

Dividends

JHAC vs. ONEQ - Dividend Comparison

JHAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than ONEQ's 0.73% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JHAC John Hancock Fundamental All Cap Core ETF	0.60%	0.58%	0.66%	0.17%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	0.73%	0.54%	0.65%	0.71%	0.97%	0.54%	0.71%	2.51%	1.08%	0.84%	1.12%	1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JHAC and ONEQ in my portfolio?

JHAC and ONEQ have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JHAC or ONEQ?

ONEQ has higher volatility (7.59%) compared to JHAC (4.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHAC dropped -24.43% vs ONEQ's -55.09%.

Which ETF is better, JHAC or ONEQ?

On 1-year performance, ONEQ leads with 31.59% vs 2.96% for JHAC. On fees, ONEQ is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, JHAC has been the lower-risk option at 4.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JHAC or ONEQ?

Over the 1-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 31.59% return vs 2.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JHAC or ONEQ?

ONEQ is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for JHAC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JHAC or ONEQ?

ONEQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.73%, compared with 0.60% for JHAC.

What is the main difference between JHAC and ONEQ?

JHAC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ONEQ is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for JHAC and 0.21% for ONEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ONEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 0.22), 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.