JHMM vs. QQJG
JHMM (John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF) and QQJG (Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - JHMM tracks the John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index while QQJG tracks the Nasdaq Next Generation 100 ESG Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, JHMM returned 17.11%/yr vs 14.09%/yr for QQJG. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JHMM charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for QQJG.
Performance
JHMM vs. QQJG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JHMM achieves a 12.87% return, which is significantly higher than QQJG's 1.44% return.
JHMM
- 1D
- 1.01%
- 1M
- 2.92%
- YTD
- 12.87%
- 6M
- 14.13%
- 1Y
- 26.43%
- 3Y*
- 17.11%
- 5Y*
- 8.57%
- 10Y*
- 11.91%
QQJG
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- 1.44%
- 6M
- 2.64%
- 1Y
- 20.44%
- 3Y*
- 14.09%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JHMM vs. QQJG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF | 12.87% | 10.73% | 14.61% | 14.53% | -15.30% | 3.42% |
QQJG Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF | 1.44% | 18.05% | 14.67% | 17.20% | -27.69% | 0.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between JHMM and QQJG is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2021 | 0.86 |
The correlation between JHMM and QQJG shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.86 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
JHMM vs. QQJG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
JHMM
QQJG
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
-
Energy
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Industrials
JHMM
QQJG
Technology
JHMM
QQJG
Financial Services
JHMM
QQJG
Consumer Cyclical
JHMM
QQJG
Healthcare
JHMM
QQJG
Utilities
JHMM
QQJG
-
Energy
JHMM
QQJG
Real Estate
JHMM
QQJG
-
Basic Materials
JHMM
QQJG
Consumer Defensive
JHMM
QQJG
Communication Services
JHMM
QQJG
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
JHMM vs. QQJG — Risk / Return Rank
JHMM
QQJG
JHMM vs. QQJG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) and Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQJG). 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.
| JHMM | QQJG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.88 | 1.47 | +0.41 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.69 | 2.11 | +0.58 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.31 | +0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.06 | 2.58 | +0.47 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.85 | 9.55 | +2.29 |
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
| JHMM | QQJG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.88 | 1.47 | +0.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.47 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.61 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.63 | 0.17 | +0.47 |
Drawdowns
JHMM vs. QQJG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JHMM drawdown since its inception was -40.71%, which is greater than QQJG's maximum drawdown of -36.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHMM and QQJG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JHMM | QQJG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.71% | -36.76% | -3.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.64% | -7.93% | -0.71% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.88% | -23.48% | +1.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.10% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.71% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.09% | +2.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.44% | -15.33% | +9.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.23% | 2.14% | +0.09% |
Volatility
JHMM vs. QQJG - Volatility Comparison
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) has a higher volatility of 3.85% compared to Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF (QQJG) at 0.00%. This indicates that JHMM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQJG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JHMM | QQJG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.85% | 0.00% | +3.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.49% | 8.36% | +2.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.11% | 14.06% | +0.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.32% | 21.71% | -3.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.60% | 21.71% | -2.11% |
JHMM vs. QQJG - Expense Ratio Comparison
JHMM has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than QQJG's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
JHMM vs. QQJG - Dividend Comparison
JHMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than QQJG's 13.86% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF | 0.87% | 0.98% | 1.01% | 1.17% | 1.16% | 0.72% | 1.04% | 1.02% | 1.36% | 0.90% | 1.15% | 0.33% |
QQJG Invesco ESG NASDAQ Next Gen 100 ETF | 13.86% | 0.68% | 0.65% | 0.54% | 0.70% | 0.08% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JHMM and QQJG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
JHMM has higher volatility (3.85%) compared to QQJG (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHMM dropped -40.71% vs QQJG's -36.76%.
On 3-year performance, JHMM leads with 17.11% vs 14.09% for QQJG. On fees, QQJG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, QQJG has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, JHMM has performed better with a 17.11% return vs 14.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QQJG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for JHMM.
QQJG has the higher dividend yield at 13.86%, compared with 0.87% for JHMM.
JHMM tracks John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index, while QQJG tracks Nasdaq Next Generation 100 ESG Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: Manulife and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for JHMM and 0.20% for QQJG.
JHMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.47), 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 JHMM and QQJG
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