JHML vs. IQM
JHML (John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF) and IQM (Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. JHML is passively managed, while IQM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, JHML returned 11.88%/yr vs 22.22%/yr for IQM. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JHML charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IQM.
Performance
JHML vs. IQM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JHML achieves a 11.62% return, which is significantly lower than IQM's 40.18% 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%
IQM
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 11.94%
- YTD
- 40.18%
- 6M
- 38.57%
- 1Y
- 75.07%
- 3Y*
- 37.62%
- 5Y*
- 22.22%
- 10Y*
- —
JHML vs. IQM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JHML John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF | 11.62% | 15.91% | 19.84% | 21.16% | -15.94% | 26.90% | 26.93% |
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 40.18% | 30.76% | 31.03% | 41.06% | -33.36% | 25.18% | 78.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between JHML and IQM is 0.74, 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 | 0.74 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020 | 0.81 |
The correlation between JHML and IQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
JHML vs. IQM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
JHML
IQM
Technology
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
JHML
IQM
Financial Services
JHML
IQM
-
Industrials
JHML
IQM
Consumer Cyclical
JHML
IQM
Healthcare
JHML
IQM
Communication Services
JHML
IQM
Consumer Defensive
JHML
IQM
-
Energy
JHML
IQM
Utilities
JHML
IQM
Basic Materials
JHML
IQM
-
Real Estate
JHML
IQM
-
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. IQM — Risk / Return Rank
JHML
IQM
JHML vs. IQM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) and Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM). 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 | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.43 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.37 | 5.13 | -1.76 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.61 | 16.79 | -1.18 |
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 | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.34 | 2.67 | -0.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 | 0.77 | -0.04 |
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 | 0.96 | -0.15 |
Drawdowns
JHML vs. IQM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JHML drawdown since its inception was -36.13%, smaller than the maximum IQM drawdown of -44.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHML and IQM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JHML | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.13% | -44.91% | +8.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.95% | -14.71% | +6.76% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.20% | -30.42% | +12.22% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.47% | -44.91% | +21.44% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.45% | -0.37% | -0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.29% | -12.25% | +7.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.71% | 4.49% | -2.78% |
Volatility
JHML vs. IQM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for John Hancock Multifactor Large Cap ETF (JHML) is 2.84%, while Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF (IQM) has a volatility of 9.20%. This indicates that JHML experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JHML | IQM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.84% | 9.20% | -6.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.70% | 22.92% | -14.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.48% | 28.27% | -16.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.29% | 28.91% | -12.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.76% | 30.72% | -12.96% |
JHML vs. IQM - Expense Ratio Comparison
JHML has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than IQM's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
JHML vs. IQM - Dividend Comparison
JHML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, while IQM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IQM Franklin Intelligent Machines ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.17% | 0.01% | 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 IQM have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IQM has higher volatility (9.20%) compared to JHML (2.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHML dropped -36.13% vs IQM's -44.91%.
On 5-year performance, IQM leads with 22.22% vs 11.88% for JHML. On fees, JHML is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, JHML has been the lower-risk option at 2.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, IQM has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 11.88%. 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 0.50% for IQM.
JHML has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.00% for IQM.
They also come from different issuers: Manulife and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for JHML and 0.50% for IQM.
IQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.34), 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 JHML and IQM
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