PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JHML vs. BDGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JHML vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHML achieves a 11.94% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.35% return.


JHML

1D
0.45%
1M
0.15%
6M
9.36%
YTD
11.94%
1Y
22.11%
3Y*
17.69%
5Y*
11.27%
10Y*
13.91%
ALL TIME*
14.08%

BDGS

1D
0.56%
1M
-0.71%
6M
4.08%
YTD
4.35%
1Y
10.14%
3Y*
13.19%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
13.11%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$35.83K$93.96K$183.58K
$3.30M$3.14M$2.58M

JHML vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
JHML
John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF
11.94%15.91%19.84%15.46%
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF
4.35%10.61%19.07%8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between JHML and BDGS is 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023

0.72

The correlation between JHML and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

JHML vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
JHML
BDGS

Technology

30.7%
38.9%

Financial Services

13.6%
9.3%

Industrials

12.3%
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
12.2%

Healthcare

9.3%
7.1%

Communication Services

7.4%
15.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.7%
3.6%

Utilities

3.7%
1.8%

Energy

3.7%
2.4%

Basic Materials

2.6%
1.3%

Real Estate

2.3%
1.5%

Technology

JHML
30.7%
BDGS
38.9%

Financial Services

JHML
13.6%
BDGS
9.3%

Industrials

JHML
12.3%
BDGS
6.8%

Consumer Cyclical

JHML
9.7%
BDGS
12.2%

Healthcare

JHML
9.3%
BDGS
7.1%

Communication Services

JHML
7.4%
BDGS
15.1%

Consumer Defensive

JHML
4.7%
BDGS
3.6%

Utilities

JHML
3.7%
BDGS
1.8%

Energy

JHML
3.7%
BDGS
2.4%

Basic Materials

JHML
2.6%
BDGS
1.3%

Real Estate

JHML
2.3%
BDGS
1.5%

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

JHML vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

JHML
JHML Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
JHML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHML Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHML Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
JHML Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHML Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

BDGS
BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

JHML vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). 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.


JHMLBDGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.28

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.58

2.04

+0.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.62

8.70

+2.92

JHML vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHML Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHML and BDGS, 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...

Drawdowns

JHML vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHML drawdown since its inception was -36.13%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHML and BDGS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JHMLBDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.13%

-9.12%

-27.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.95%

-4.76%

-3.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.20%

-9.12%

-9.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.67%

-2.03%

+1.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.25%

-0.69%

-3.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.76%

1.12%

+0.64%

Volatility

JHML vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) is 2.94%, while Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) has a volatility of 3.21%. This indicates that JHML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BDGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JHMLBDGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.94%

3.21%

-0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.41%

6.11%

+3.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.10%

7.06%

+5.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.33%

8.30%

+8.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.74%

8.30%

+9.44%

JHML vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHML has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.


Dividends

JHML vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

JHML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, more than BDGS's 0.53% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF
0.53%0.55%1.81%0.84%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
JHML
John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF
0.96%1.06%1.16%1.39%1.46%1.08%1.59%1.73%1.57%1.44%1.36%0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions


JHML and BDGS 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.

BDGS has higher volatility (3.21%) compared to JHML (2.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHML dropped -36.13% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

On 3-year performance, JHML leads with 17.69% vs 13.19% for BDGS. On fees, JHML is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, JHML has been the lower-risk option at 2.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, JHML has performed better with a 17.69% return vs 13.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

JHML is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

JHML has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.

JHML is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BDGS is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Manulife and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for JHML and 0.87% for BDGS.

JHML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.38), 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 JHML and BDGS

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