JHCP vs. BNDS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JHCP (John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF) and BNDS (Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JHCP returned 6.12% vs 12.86% for BNDS. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. JHCP charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for BNDS.

Performance

JHCP vs. BNDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHCP achieves a 0.33% return, which is significantly lower than BNDS's 4.23% return.

JHCP

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -0.29%
• YTD: 0.33%
• 6M: 0.19%
• 1Y: 6.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BNDS

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 0.17%
• YTD: 4.23%
• 6M: 4.33%
• 1Y: 12.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JHCP vs. BNDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF	0.33%	7.95%
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	4.23%	8.30%

Correlation

The correlation between JHCP and BNDS is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2025	0.45

Return for Risk

JHCP vs. BNDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

JHCP

JHCP Risk / Return Rank: 41
JHCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
JHCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
JHCP Omega Ratio Rank: 38
JHCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
JHCP Martin Ratio Rank: 40

BNDS

BNDS Risk / Return Rank: 89
BNDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
BNDS Omega Ratio Rank: 96
BNDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
BNDS Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

JHCP vs. BNDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). 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.

	JHCP	BNDS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	3.65	-2.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.14	5.40	-3.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.78	-0.53
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	3.75	-1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.24	17.29	-11.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JHCP vs. BNDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHCP Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is lower than the BNDS Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHCP and BNDS, 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

	JHCP	BNDS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.44	3.65	-2.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	1.75	-0.66

Drawdowns

JHCP vs. BNDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHCP drawdown since its inception was -3.06%, smaller than the maximum BNDS drawdown of -6.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHCP and BNDS.

Drawdown Indicators

	JHCP	BNDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.06%	-6.96%	+3.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.82%	-3.45%	+0.63%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.56%	-0.34%	-1.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.81%	-0.82%	+0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.98%	0.75%	+0.23%

Volatility

JHCP vs. BNDS - Volatility Comparison

John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) has a higher volatility of 1.37% compared to Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) at 0.86%. This indicates that JHCP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JHCP	BNDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	0.86%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.04%	2.74%	+0.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.27%	3.55%	+0.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.83%	5.29%	-0.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.83%	5.29%	-0.46%

JHCP vs. BNDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHCP has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than BNDS's 0.81% expense ratio.

Dividends

JHCP vs. BNDS - Dividend Comparison

JHCP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.66%, less than BNDS's 7.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	7.97%	7.98%	0.00%
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF	4.66%	4.79%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JHCP and BNDS in my portfolio?

JHCP and BNDS have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JHCP or BNDS?

JHCP has higher volatility (1.37%) compared to BNDS (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHCP dropped -3.06% vs BNDS's -6.96%.

Which ETF is better, JHCP or BNDS?

On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 12.86% vs 6.12% for JHCP. On fees, JHCP is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, BNDS has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JHCP or BNDS?

Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 12.86% return vs 6.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JHCP or BNDS?

JHCP is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BNDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JHCP or BNDS?

BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.97%, compared with 4.66% for JHCP.

What is the main difference between JHCP and BNDS?

They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and InfraCap. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for JHCP and 0.81% for BNDS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 vs 1.44), 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.