PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
JHSC vs. RFG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

JHSC vs. RFG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

JHSC (John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - JHSC tracks the John Hancock Dimensional Small Cap Index while RFG tracks the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, JHSC returned 7.89%/yr vs 6.33%/yr for RFG. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. JHSC charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RFG.

Performance

JHSC vs. RFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF (JHSC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JHSC achieves a 15.31% return, which is significantly higher than RFG's 13.90% return.

JHSC

1D
-0.23%
1M
0.23%
6M
8.71%
YTD
15.31%
1Y
24.76%
3Y*
12.62%
5Y*
7.89%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
8.97%

RFG

1D
0.12%
1M
-4.54%
6M
8.66%
YTD
13.90%
1Y
19.95%
3Y*
14.10%
5Y*
6.33%
10Y*
9.64%
ALL TIME*
9.54%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

JHSC

John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF
$4.07M$3.28M$2.18M

RFG

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF
$240.77K$300.86K$394.29K

JHSC vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
JHSC
John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF		15.31%6.88%9.74%20.77%-14.65%19.55%11.60%24.43%-12.50%4.48%
RFG
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF		13.90%8.80%17.80%16.42%-21.70%13.81%32.86%17.09%-13.98%2.67%

Correlation

The correlation between JHSC and RFG is 0.80, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

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

0.80

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

0.87

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2017

0.89

The correlation between JHSC and RFG shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (1 year) to 0.90 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

JHSC vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
JHSC
RFG

Financial Services

18.6%
3.4%

Industrials

17.0%
31.6%

Technology

14.8%
23.3%

Consumer Cyclical

14.1%
6.7%

Healthcare

8.6%
19.3%

Real Estate

6.2%
1.9%

Energy

6.1%
4.0%

Basic Materials

5.1%
3.6%

Utilities

3.8%
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
2.4%

Communication Services

2.8%
1.6%

Financial Services

JHSC
18.6%
RFG
3.4%

Industrials

JHSC
17.0%
RFG
31.6%

Technology

JHSC
14.8%
RFG
23.3%

Consumer Cyclical

JHSC
14.1%
RFG
6.7%

Healthcare

JHSC
8.6%
RFG
19.3%

Real Estate

JHSC
6.2%
RFG
1.9%

Energy

JHSC
6.1%
RFG
4.0%

Basic Materials

JHSC
5.1%
RFG
3.6%

Utilities

JHSC
3.8%
RFG
2.2%

Consumer Defensive

JHSC
3.0%
RFG
2.4%

Communication Services

JHSC
2.8%
RFG
1.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF

Often compared with JHSC:
JHSC vs. CALFJHSC vs. XLEJHSC vs. SMMVJHSC vs. SQLVJHSC vs. JHMDJHSC vs. JHEMJHSC vs. VB
Often compared with RFG:
RFG vs. RFVRFG vs. IVOGRFG vs. SPMDRFG vs. FRTYRFG vs. FDISRFG vs. VOTRFG vs. IMCG

Return for Risk

JHSC vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
JHSC
JHSC Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
JHSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHSC Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
JHSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHSC Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
RFG
RFG Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

JHSC vs. RFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF (JHSC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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.

JHSCRFGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.44
0.95

+0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.17
1.46

+0.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.17

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.40

1.81

+0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.46

6.13

+2.33

JHSC vs. RFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JHSC Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is higher than the RFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JHSC and RFG, 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

JHSC vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JHSC drawdown since its inception was -42.66%, smaller than the maximum RFG drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JHSC and RFG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

JHSCRFGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.66%

-51.93%

+9.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.63%

-10.41%

+0.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.16%

-26.71%

+1.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.21%

-35.16%

+9.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-42.92%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.02%

-7.56%

+6.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.65%

-8.93%

+1.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.73%

3.07%

-0.34%

Volatility

JHSC vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF (JHSC) is 3.42%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.10%. This indicates that JHSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

JHSCRFGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.42%

6.10%

-2.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.00%

16.32%

-5.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.07%

19.84%

-3.77%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.05%

22.99%

-2.94%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.07%

23.10%

-1.03%

JHSC vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

JHSC has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than RFG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

JHSC vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison

JHSC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than RFG's 0.15% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JHSC
John Hancock Multifactor Small Cap ETF		1.01%1.13%0.96%0.98%1.13%1.08%1.12%1.14%1.09%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RFG
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF		0.15%0.43%0.38%0.99%0.78%0.05%0.27%0.64%0.76%0.66%0.35%0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

JHSC and RFG have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RFG has higher volatility (6.10%) compared to JHSC (3.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JHSC dropped -42.66% vs RFG's -51.93%.

On 5-year performance, JHSC leads with 7.89% vs 6.33% for RFG. On fees, RFG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, JHSC has been the lower-risk option at 3.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, JHSC has performed better with a 7.89% return vs 6.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for JHSC.

JHSC has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.15% for RFG.

JHSC tracks John Hancock Dimensional Small Cap Index, while RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: Manulife and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for JHSC and 0.35% for RFG.

JHSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 0.95), 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 JHSC and RFG

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