JMID vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

JMID (Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JMID is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Janus Henderson, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JMID returned 12.39% vs 1.94% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.33, they often move in opposite directions. JMID charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

JMID vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JMID achieves a 7.76% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.90% return.

JMID

• 1D: -2.45%
• 1M: 0.15%
• YTD: 7.76%
• 6M: 6.12%
• 1Y: 12.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 0.02%
• YTD: 0.90%
• 6M: 0.76%
• 1Y: 1.94%
• 3Y*: 4.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JMID vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	7.76%	5.56%	11.37%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.90%	2.55%	1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between JMID and CAOS is -0.33, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2024	-0.33

JMID vs. CAOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JMID	CAOS
Industrials	27.2%	8.5%
Consumer Cyclical	20.6%	10.0%
Technology	18.4%	33.1%
Healthcare	13.9%	9.6%
Financial Services	6.0%	12.4%
Communication Services	4.0%	10.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	5.4%
Real Estate	2.4%	2.0%
Energy	2.0%	4.1%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.9%
Utilities	0.9%	2.6%

Return for Risk

JMID vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

JMID

JMID Risk / Return Rank: 24
JMID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
JMID Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
JMID Omega Ratio Rank: 22
JMID Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
JMID Martin Ratio Rank: 29

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 43
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 42
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 42

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.

JMID vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	JMID	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.74	1.27	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.16	2.03	-0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.26	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.15	2.57	-1.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.86	6.37	-2.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JMID vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JMID Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is lower than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JMID and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JMID	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74	1.27	-0.53
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	1.21	-0.52

Drawdowns

JMID vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JMID drawdown since its inception was -25.58%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JMID and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	JMID	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.58%	-3.60%	-21.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.82%	-0.76%	-10.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.72%	-0.99%	-1.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-0.90%	-3.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	0.30%	+2.92%

Volatility

JMID vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) has a higher volatility of 4.73% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.27%. This indicates that JMID's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JMID	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.73%	0.27%	+4.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.93%	1.03%	+11.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.74%	1.53%	+15.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.64%	4.25%	+17.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.64%	4.25%	+17.39%

JMID vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

JMID has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

JMID vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

JMID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	0.65%	0.75%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JMID and CAOS in my portfolio?

JMID and CAOS have a correlation of -0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JMID or CAOS?

JMID has higher volatility (4.73%) compared to CAOS (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JMID dropped -25.58% vs CAOS's -3.60%.

Which ETF is better, JMID or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, JMID leads with 12.39% vs 1.94% for CAOS. On fees, JMID is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JMID or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, JMID has performed better with a 12.39% return vs 1.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JMID or CAOS?

JMID is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.63% for CAOS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JMID or CAOS?

JMID has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between JMID and CAOS?

JMID is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Janus Henderson and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for JMID and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CAOS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.27 vs 0.74), 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.