PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JHMU vs. RVNU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JHMU vs. RVNU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Dynamic Municipal Bond ETF (JHMU) and Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHMU achieves a 1.83% return, which is significantly lower than RVNU's 3.90% return.


JHMU

1D
0.17%
1M
0.81%
YTD
1.83%
6M
2.36%
1Y
7.41%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

RVNU

1D
0.18%
1M
1.50%
YTD
3.90%
6M
3.22%
1Y
9.36%
3Y*
3.44%
5Y*
-0.19%
10Y*
1.93%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JHMU vs. RVNU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
JHMU
John Hancock Dynamic Municipal Bond ETF
1.83%5.03%3.76%7.77%
RVNU
Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF
3.90%0.58%1.46%10.84%

Correlation

The correlation between JHMU and RVNU is 0.56, 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

0.56

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 3, 2023

0.62

The correlation between JHMU and RVNU has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

JHMU vs. RVNU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

JHMU
JHMU Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
JHMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHMU Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
JHMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHMU Martin Ratio Rank: 5656
Martin Ratio Rank

RVNU
RVNU Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
RVNU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RVNU Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
RVNU Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
RVNU Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
RVNU Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

JHMU vs. RVNU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Dynamic Municipal Bond ETF (JHMU) and Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU). 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.


JHMURVNUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

1.35

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.69

3.82

-1.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.63

11.40

-1.77

JHMU vs. RVNU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHMU Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is higher than the RVNU Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHMU and RVNU, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JHMURVNUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.64

1.84

+0.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.76

0.39

+1.37

Drawdowns

JHMU vs. RVNU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHMU drawdown since its inception was -4.48%, smaller than the maximum RVNU drawdown of -23.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHMU and RVNU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JHMURVNUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.48%

-23.51%

+19.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.77%

-2.46%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.51%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-23.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-2.63%

+2.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.84%

-4.98%

+4.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.77%

0.83%

-0.06%

Volatility

JHMU vs. RVNU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for John Hancock Dynamic Municipal Bond ETF (JHMU) is 0.97%, while Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF (RVNU) has a volatility of 1.43%. This indicates that JHMU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RVNU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JHMURVNUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.97%

1.43%

-0.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.21%

3.41%

-1.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.82%

5.12%

-2.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.11%

7.19%

-3.08%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.11%

7.27%

-3.16%

JHMU vs. RVNU - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHMU has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than RVNU's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

JHMU vs. RVNU - Dividend Comparison

JHMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.72%, more than RVNU's 3.51% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JHMU
John Hancock Dynamic Municipal Bond ETF
3.72%4.36%7.29%0.63%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RVNU
Xtrackers Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond ETF
3.51%3.46%3.06%2.79%2.81%2.18%2.43%2.75%2.76%2.49%2.72%3.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


JHMU and RVNU have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RVNU has higher volatility (1.43%) compared to JHMU (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHMU dropped -4.48% vs RVNU's -23.51%.

On 1-year performance, RVNU leads with 9.36% vs 7.41% for JHMU. On fees, RVNU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, JHMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RVNU has performed better with a 9.36% return vs 7.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RVNU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for JHMU.

JHMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.72%, compared with 3.51% for RVNU.

JHMU tracks John Hancock Dimensional Utilities Index, while RVNU tracks Solactive Municipal Infrastructure Revenue Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: John Hancock and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for JHMU and 0.15% for RVNU.

JHMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 1.84), 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 JHMU and RVNU

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