JHML vs. GQGU
JHML (John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. JHML is passively managed, while GQGU is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. JHML charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
JHML vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JHML achieves a 11.62% return, which is significantly higher than GQGU's 6.60% return.
JHML
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 4.79%
- YTD
- 11.62%
- 6M
- 11.80%
- 1Y
- 26.67%
- 3Y*
- 20.37%
- 5Y*
- 11.88%
- 10Y*
- 14.24%
GQGU
- 1D
- -1.06%
- 1M
- -1.65%
- YTD
- 6.60%
- 6M
- 7.16%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JHML vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
JHML John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF | 11.62% | 8.31% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 6.60% | -1.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between JHML and GQGU is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025 | -0.02 |
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. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
JHML
GQGU
JHML vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.
| JHML | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.37 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.61 | — | — |
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
| JHML | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.80 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.81 | 0.60 | +0.21 |
Drawdowns
JHML vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JHML drawdown since its inception was -36.13%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -6.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHML and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JHML | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.13% | -6.65% | -29.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.95% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.20% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.47% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.45% | -4.66% | +4.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.29% | -2.54% | -1.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.71% | — | — |
Volatility
JHML vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JHML | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.84% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.70% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.48% | 10.14% | +1.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.29% | 10.14% | +6.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.76% | 10.14% | +7.62% |
JHML vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
JHML has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
JHML vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
JHML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than GQGU's 0.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
JHML John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF | 0.95% | 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 GQGU have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, JHML is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
JHML is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GQGU.
JHML and GQGU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.95%.
They also come from different issuers: Manulife and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for JHML and 0.49% for GQGU.
Find the right allocation for JHML and GQGU
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