PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JHDV vs. IGF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JHDV vs. IGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock U.S. High Dividend ETF (JHDV) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHDV achieves a 20.00% return, which is significantly higher than IGF's 8.67% return.


JHDV

1D
0.79%
1M
7.92%
YTD
20.00%
6M
20.97%
1Y
36.17%
3Y*
22.66%
5Y*
10Y*

IGF

1D
1.45%
1M
-2.14%
YTD
8.67%
6M
8.66%
1Y
15.53%
3Y*
16.13%
5Y*
10.42%
10Y*
8.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JHDV vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
JHDV
John Hancock U.S. High Dividend ETF
20.00%14.76%20.25%15.99%6.99%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
8.67%21.31%14.81%6.14%6.64%

Correlation

The correlation between JHDV and IGF is 0.52, 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

0.52

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2022

0.62

The correlation between JHDV and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.62 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

JHDV vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

JHDV
JHDV Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
JHDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHDV Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
JHDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHDV Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

IGF
IGF Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

JHDV vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock U.S. High Dividend ETF (JHDV) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.


JHDVIGFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.10

1.49

+1.61

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.18

2.14

+2.04

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.27

+0.29

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.43

2.86

+1.57

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.62

8.91

+9.71

JHDV vs. IGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHDV Sharpe Ratio is 3.10, which is higher than the IGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHDV and IGF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JHDVIGFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.10

1.49

+1.61

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.39

0.24

+1.15

Drawdowns

JHDV vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHDV drawdown since its inception was -18.97%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHDV and IGF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JHDVIGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.97%

-58.33%

+39.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.26%

-5.87%

-2.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.97%

-14.28%

-4.69%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.83%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.88%

+3.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.62%

-11.87%

+9.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

1.88%

+0.09%

Volatility

JHDV vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for John Hancock U.S. High Dividend ETF (JHDV) is 3.12%, while iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) has a volatility of 3.74%. This indicates that JHDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JHDVIGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.12%

3.74%

-0.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.89%

8.61%

+0.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.71%

10.52%

+1.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.69%

13.99%

+1.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.69%

16.84%

-1.15%

JHDV vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHDV has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is lower than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

JHDV vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison

JHDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.97%, less than IGF's 2.97% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
2.97%3.23%3.21%3.36%2.67%2.42%2.33%3.27%3.52%2.95%2.98%3.25%
JHDV
John Hancock U.S. High Dividend ETF
1.97%2.40%2.50%2.77%0.85%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


JHDV and IGF have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IGF has higher volatility (3.74%) compared to JHDV (3.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHDV dropped -18.97% vs IGF's -58.33%.

On 3-year performance, JHDV leads with 22.66% vs 16.13% for IGF. On fees, JHDV is cheaper at 0.34% per year. On volatility, JHDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, JHDV has performed better with a 22.66% return vs 16.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

JHDV is cheaper with a 0.34% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IGF.

IGF has the higher dividend yield at 2.97%, compared with 1.97% for JHDV.

JHDV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while IGF is Industrials Equities. They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for JHDV and 0.39% for IGF.

JHDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.10 vs 1.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JHDV and IGF

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