JHMD vs. EFAS
JHMD (John Hancock Multifactor Developed International ETF) and EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - JHMD tracks the John Hancock Dimensional Developed International Index while EFAS tracks the MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, JHMD returned 8.47%/yr vs 12.04%/yr for EFAS. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JHMD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.56%/yr for EFAS.
Performance
JHMD vs. EFAS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JHMD achieves a 7.87% return, which is significantly lower than EFAS's 12.96% return.
JHMD
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 2.80%
- YTD
- 7.87%
- 6M
- 10.87%
- 1Y
- 21.60%
- 3Y*
- 16.74%
- 5Y*
- 8.47%
- 10Y*
- —
EFAS
- 1D
- -0.58%
- 1M
- -0.80%
- YTD
- 12.96%
- 6M
- 17.29%
- 1Y
- 28.68%
- 3Y*
- 24.47%
- 5Y*
- 12.04%
- 10Y*
- —
JHMD vs. EFAS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JHMD John Hancock Multifactor Developed International ETF | 7.87% | 33.91% | 1.78% | 19.43% | -13.95% | 11.83% | 7.25% | 19.83% | -14.54% | 25.02% |
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF | 12.96% | 46.83% | 3.07% | 14.65% | -8.00% | 12.75% | -5.42% | 14.60% | -11.60% | 22.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between JHMD and EFAS 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2016 | 0.75 |
The correlation between JHMD and EFAS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
JHMD vs. EFAS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
JHMD
EFAS
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Utilities
Communication Services
Energy
Real Estate
Financial Services
JHMD
EFAS
Industrials
JHMD
EFAS
Healthcare
JHMD
EFAS
Basic Materials
JHMD
EFAS
Consumer Cyclical
JHMD
EFAS
Consumer Defensive
JHMD
EFAS
Technology
JHMD
EFAS
Utilities
JHMD
EFAS
Communication Services
JHMD
EFAS
Energy
JHMD
EFAS
Real Estate
JHMD
EFAS
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
JHMD vs. EFAS — Risk / Return Rank
JHMD
EFAS
JHMD vs. EFAS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Developed International ETF (JHMD) and Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS). 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.
| JHMD | EFAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.24 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.69 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.47 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.93 | 5.44 | -3.50 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.21 | 14.48 | -7.28 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| JHMD | EFAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.48 | 2.73 | -1.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 | 0.78 | -0.25 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.55 | 0.56 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
JHMD vs. EFAS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JHMD drawdown since its inception was -35.67%, smaller than the maximum EFAS drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHMD and EFAS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JHMD | EFAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -35.67% | -44.38% | +8.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.23% | -5.30% | -5.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.38% | -11.84% | -1.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.38% | -28.81% | -0.57% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.48% | -3.01% | +0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.73% | -7.08% | +0.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.00% | 1.99% | +1.01% |
Volatility
JHMD vs. EFAS - Volatility Comparison
John Hancock Multifactor Developed International ETF (JHMD) has a higher volatility of 4.89% compared to Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) at 2.96%. This indicates that JHMD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JHMD | EFAS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.89% | 2.96% | +1.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.05% | 8.20% | +3.85% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.66% | 10.60% | +4.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.26% | 15.59% | +0.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.20% | 18.33% | -1.13% |
JHMD vs. EFAS - Expense Ratio Comparison
JHMD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than EFAS's 0.56% expense ratio.
Dividends
JHMD vs. EFAS - Dividend Comparison
JHMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, less than EFAS's 5.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF | 5.05% | 4.83% | 6.76% | 6.33% | 7.28% | 5.19% | 4.34% | 5.75% | 6.63% | 6.15% | 0.21% |
JHMD John Hancock Multifactor Developed International ETF | 2.96% | 3.19% | 3.55% | 3.01% | 2.85% | 3.22% | 1.89% | 3.19% | 2.09% | 2.27% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JHMD and EFAS 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.
JHMD has higher volatility (4.89%) compared to EFAS (2.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHMD dropped -35.67% vs EFAS's -44.38%.
On 5-year performance, EFAS leads with 12.04% vs 8.47% for JHMD. On fees, JHMD is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, EFAS has been the lower-risk option at 2.96%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 12.04% return vs 8.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
JHMD is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.56% for EFAS.
EFAS has the higher dividend yield at 5.05%, compared with 2.96% for JHMD.
JHMD tracks John Hancock Dimensional Developed International Index, while EFAS tracks MSCI EAFE Top 50 Dividend Index. They also come from different issuers: Manulife and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for JHMD and 0.56% for EFAS.
EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 1.48), 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 JHMD and EFAS
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