JHCP vs. MAMB
JHCP (John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF) and MAMB (Monarch Ambassador Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. JHCP is actively managed, while MAMB is passively managed. Over the past year, JHCP returned 5.40% vs 8.14% for MAMB. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JHCP charges 0.36%/yr vs 1.49%/yr for MAMB.
Performance
JHCP vs. MAMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JHCP achieves a 0.55% return, which is significantly lower than MAMB's 1.70% return.
JHCP
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- 0.69%
- YTD
- 0.55%
- 6M
- 0.96%
- 1Y
- 5.40%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAMB
- 1D
- -0.31%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- 1.70%
- 6M
- 1.42%
- 1Y
- 8.14%
- 3Y*
- 5.28%
- 5Y*
- 0.72%
- 10Y*
- —
JHCP vs. MAMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF | 0.55% | 7.59% | -1.05% |
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF | 1.70% | 10.69% | -1.30% |
Correlation
The correlation between JHCP and MAMB is 0.70, 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 | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2024 | 0.77 |
The correlation between JHCP and MAMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
JHCP vs. MAMB — Risk / Return Rank
JHCP
MAMB
JHCP vs. MAMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) and Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB). 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.
| JHCP | MAMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.25 | -0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.92 | 2.30 | -0.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.24 | 6.14 | -0.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
JHCP vs. MAMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JHCP drawdown since its inception was -3.06%, smaller than the maximum MAMB drawdown of -19.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHCP and MAMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JHCP | MAMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.06% | -19.33% | +16.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.82% | -3.55% | +0.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -7.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.33% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.35% | -1.95% | +0.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.88% | -7.45% | +6.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.03% | 1.33% | -0.30% |
Volatility
JHCP vs. MAMB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF (JHCP) is 1.08%, while Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB) has a volatility of 1.71%. This indicates that JHCP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MAMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JHCP | MAMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.08% | 1.71% | -0.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.05% | 4.42% | -1.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.25% | 5.74% | -1.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.85% | 7.02% | -2.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.85% | 6.91% | -2.06% |
JHCP vs. MAMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
JHCP has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than MAMB's 1.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
JHCP vs. MAMB - Dividend Comparison
JHCP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.65%, more than MAMB's 2.45% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JHCP John Hancock Core Plus Bond ETF | 4.65% | 4.79% | 0.20% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF | 2.45% | 2.47% | 2.11% | 1.73% | 0.92% | 0.56% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JHCP and MAMB have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MAMB has higher volatility (1.71%) compared to JHCP (1.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHCP dropped -3.06% vs MAMB's -19.33%.
On 1-year performance, MAMB leads with 8.14% vs 5.40% for JHCP. On fees, JHCP is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, JHCP has been the lower-risk option at 1.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MAMB has performed better with a 8.14% return vs 5.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
JHCP is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for MAMB.
JHCP has the higher dividend yield at 4.65%, compared with 2.45% for MAMB.
They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and Monarch. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for JHCP and 1.49% for MAMB.
MAMB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 1.28), 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.
Find the right allocation for JHCP and MAMB
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer