JHCB vs. BSCQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JHCB (John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF) and BSCQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds. JHCB is actively managed, while BSCQ is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, JHCB returned 0.64%/yr vs 1.47%/yr for BSCQ. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JHCB charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for BSCQ.

Performance

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF (JHCB) and Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHCB achieves a 0.37% return, which is significantly lower than BSCQ's 1.55% return.

JHCB

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.63%
• YTD: 0.37%
• 6M: -0.08%
• 1Y: 5.68%
• 3Y*: 5.68%
• 5Y*: 0.64%
• 10Y*: —

BSCQ

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 1.55%
• 6M: 1.92%
• 1Y: 4.41%
• 3Y*: 5.06%
• 5Y*: 1.47%
• 10Y*: —

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

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
JHCB John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF	0.37%	8.02%	2.75%	8.89%	-15.93%	3.41%
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF	1.55%	5.02%	4.86%	5.71%	-8.31%	0.66%

Correlation

The correlation between JHCB and BSCQ is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2021	0.72

Over the past year, the correlation between JHCB and BSCQ has dropped to 0.07 - well below their long-term average of 0.72, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

JHCB vs. BSCQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

JHCB

JHCB Risk / Return Rank: 37
JHCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
JHCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
JHCB Omega Ratio Rank: 35
JHCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
JHCB Martin Ratio Rank: 38

BSCQ

BSCQ Risk / Return Rank: 99
BSCQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Omega Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF (JHCB) and Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ). 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.

	JHCB	BSCQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.30	7.06	-5.76
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.89	15.22	-13.33
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	3.45	-2.21
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	43.24	-41.43
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.94	179.65	-173.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is lower than the BSCQ Sharpe Ratio of 7.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHCB and BSCQ, 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

	JHCB	BSCQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.30	7.06	-5.76
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.09	0.45	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.15	0.60	-0.45

Drawdowns

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHCB drawdown since its inception was -22.61%, which is greater than BSCQ's maximum drawdown of -16.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHCB and BSCQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	JHCB	BSCQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.61%	-16.50%	-6.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.16%	-0.10%	-3.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.54%	-1.13%	-5.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.61%	-13.02%	-9.59%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.04%	0.00%	-1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.21%	-2.85%	-5.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	0.02%	+0.94%

Volatility

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Volatility Comparison

John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF (JHCB) has a higher volatility of 1.42% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) at 0.17%. This indicates that JHCB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSCQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JHCB	BSCQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.42%	0.17%	+1.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.25%	0.43%	+2.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.41%	0.63%	+3.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.95%	3.30%	+3.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.88%	4.77%	+2.11%

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHCB has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than BSCQ's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

JHCB vs. BSCQ - Dividend Comparison

JHCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.96%, more than BSCQ's 4.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF	4.12%	4.14%	4.05%	3.53%	2.54%	1.91%	2.42%	2.96%	3.32%	2.92%	0.51%
JHCB John Hancock Corporate Bond ETF	4.96%	4.92%	5.02%	4.35%	3.86%	2.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JHCB and BSCQ in my portfolio?

JHCB and BSCQ have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JHCB or BSCQ?

JHCB has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to BSCQ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHCB dropped -22.61% vs BSCQ's -16.50%.

Which ETF is better, JHCB or BSCQ?

On 5-year performance, BSCQ leads with 1.47% vs 0.64% for JHCB. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JHCB or BSCQ?

Over the 5-year period, BSCQ has performed better with a 1.47% return vs 0.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JHCB or BSCQ?

BSCQ is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for JHCB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JHCB or BSCQ?

JHCB has the higher dividend yield at 4.96%, compared with 4.12% for BSCQ.

What is the main difference between JHCB and BSCQ?

They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for JHCB and 0.10% for BSCQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.06 vs 1.30), 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.