JMID vs. QMOM

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

JMID (Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF) and QMOM (Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JMID is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Janus Henderson, while QMOM is a Momentum fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JMID returned 8.78% vs 25.16% for QMOM. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JMID charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for QMOM.

Performance

JMID vs. QMOM - 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 U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JMID achieves a 5.78% return, which is significantly lower than QMOM's 20.72% return.

JMID

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: -2.23%
• YTD: 5.78%
• 6M: 3.60%
• 1Y: 8.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMOM

• 1D: 1.73%
• 1M: -1.23%
• YTD: 20.72%
• 6M: 18.00%
• 1Y: 25.16%
• 3Y*: 21.88%
• 5Y*: 10.30%
• 10Y*: 13.91%

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

JMID vs. QMOM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	5.78%	5.56%	11.33%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	20.72%	2.36%	5.43%

Correlation

The correlation between JMID and QMOM is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2024	0.78

The correlation between JMID and QMOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

JMID vs. QMOM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JMID	QMOM
Technology	28.3%	24.6%
Industrials	24.5%	25.6%
Consumer Cyclical	18.1%	6.0%
Healthcare	11.1%	8.0%
Financial Services	5.1%	1.9%
Communication Services	4.9%	2.0%
Real Estate	2.2%	-
Consumer Defensive	2.1%	2.0%
Basic Materials	1.5%	15.9%
Energy	1.5%	16.0%
Utilities	0.7%	2.0%

Return for Risk

JMID vs. QMOM — Risk / Return Rank

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

JMID

JMID Risk / Return Rank: 18
JMID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
JMID Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
JMID Omega Ratio Rank: 15
JMID Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
JMID Martin Ratio Rank: 22

QMOM

QMOM Risk / Return Rank: 37
QMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
QMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
QMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 31
QMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
QMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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. QMOM - 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 U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM). 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.

	JMID	QMOM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.52	1.02	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.85	1.49	-0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.19	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.82	2.00	-1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.66	6.97	-4.31

JMID vs. QMOM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JMID Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is lower than the QMOM Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JMID and QMOM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

JMID vs. QMOM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JMID drawdown since its inception was -25.58%, smaller than the maximum QMOM drawdown of -39.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JMID and QMOM.

Drawdown Indicators

	JMID	QMOM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.58%	-39.13%	+13.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.82%	-12.65%	+1.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-26.46%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.82%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.51%	-3.51%	-1.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.52%	-12.88%	+8.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.30%	3.62%	-0.32%

Volatility

JMID vs. QMOM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) is 5.32%, while Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) has a volatility of 9.28%. This indicates that JMID experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JMID	QMOM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.32%	9.28%	-3.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.30%	21.15%	-7.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.89%	24.75%	-7.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.53%	24.44%	-2.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.53%	26.62%	-5.09%

JMID vs. QMOM - Expense Ratio Comparison

JMID has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than QMOM's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

JMID vs. QMOM - Dividend Comparison

JMID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, more than QMOM's 0.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	0.66%	0.75%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QMOM Alpha Architect U.S. Quantitative Momentum ETF	0.45%	0.54%	1.40%	0.87%	1.59%	0.12%	0.08%	0.01%	0.05%	0.13%	0.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JMID and QMOM in my portfolio?

JMID and QMOM have a correlation of 0.78, 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 QMOM?

QMOM has higher volatility (9.28%) compared to JMID (5.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JMID dropped -25.58% vs QMOM's -39.13%.

Which ETF is better, JMID or QMOM?

On 1-year performance, QMOM leads with 25.16% vs 8.78% for JMID. On fees, QMOM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, JMID has been the lower-risk option at 5.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JMID or QMOM?

Over the 1-year period, QMOM has performed better with a 25.16% return vs 8.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JMID or QMOM?

QMOM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for JMID.

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

JMID has the higher dividend yield at 0.66%, compared with 0.45% for QMOM.

What is the main difference between JMID and QMOM?

JMID is categorized as Mid Cap Growth Equities, while QMOM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Janus Henderson and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for JMID and 0.28% for QMOM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.02 vs 0.52), 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.