JMID vs. VOT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

JMID (Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF) and VOT (Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. JMID is actively managed, while VOT is passively managed. Over the past year, JMID returned 14.19% vs 8.39% for VOT. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JMID charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VOT.

Performance

JMID vs. VOT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JMID achieves a 10.46% return, which is significantly higher than VOT's 5.36% return.

JMID

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 10.46%
• 6M: 9.00%
• 1Y: 14.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VOT

• 1D: -3.46%
• 1M: 0.03%
• YTD: 5.36%
• 6M: 3.31%
• 1Y: 8.39%
• 3Y*: 15.01%
• 5Y*: 6.28%
• 10Y*: 11.75%

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

JMID vs. VOT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	10.46%	5.56%	11.37%
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF	5.36%	10.72%	7.66%

Correlation

The correlation between JMID and VOT is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2024	0.93

The correlation between JMID and VOT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

JMID vs. VOT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JMID	VOT
Industrials	27.2%	23.7%
Consumer Cyclical	20.6%	13.9%
Technology	18.4%	28.9%
Healthcare	13.9%	9.3%
Financial Services	6.0%	6.8%
Communication Services	4.0%	3.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	0.8%
Real Estate	2.4%	4.8%
Energy	2.0%	2.7%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.8%
Utilities	0.9%	3.5%

Return for Risk

JMID vs. VOT — Risk / Return Rank

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

JMID

JMID Risk / Return Rank: 26
JMID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
JMID Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
JMID Omega Ratio Rank: 23
JMID Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
JMID Martin Ratio Rank: 31

VOT

VOT Risk / Return Rank: 17
VOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
VOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
VOT Omega Ratio Rank: 17
VOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
VOT Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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. VOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) and Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT). 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	VOT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.86	0.52	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.33	0.82	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.15	1.10	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.32	0.53	+0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.42	1.58	+2.84
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. VOT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JMID Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is higher than the VOT Sharpe Ratio of 0.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JMID and VOT, 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	VOT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86	0.52	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.29	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.56	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	0.44	+0.33

Drawdowns

JMID vs. VOT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JMID drawdown since its inception was -25.58%, smaller than the maximum VOT drawdown of -60.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JMID and VOT.

Drawdown Indicators

	JMID	VOT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.58%	-60.16%	+34.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.82%	-15.96%	+5.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.77%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.19%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.19%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	-3.60%	+3.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-9.96%	+5.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.22%	5.32%	-2.10%

Volatility

JMID vs. VOT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF (JMID) is 4.23%, while Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) has a volatility of 5.52%. This indicates that JMID experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JMID	VOT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.23%	5.52%	-1.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.68%	12.85%	-0.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.56%	16.18%	+0.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.58%	21.40%	+0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.58%	21.01%	+0.57%

JMID vs. VOT - Expense Ratio Comparison

JMID has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than VOT's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

JMID vs. VOT - Dividend Comparison

JMID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, which matches VOT's 0.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JMID Janus Henderson Mid Cap Growth Alpha ETF	0.63%	0.75%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.63%	0.64%	0.67%	0.71%	0.78%	0.34%	0.56%	0.78%	0.84%	0.72%	0.81%	0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JMID and VOT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, JMID and VOT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, JMID or VOT?

VOT has higher volatility (5.52%) compared to JMID (4.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JMID dropped -25.58% vs VOT's -60.16%.

Which ETF is better, JMID or VOT?

On 1-year performance, JMID leads with 14.19% vs 8.39% for VOT. On fees, VOT is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, JMID has been the lower-risk option at 4.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JMID or VOT?

Over the 1-year period, JMID has performed better with a 14.19% return vs 8.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JMID or VOT?

VOT is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for JMID.

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

JMID and VOT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.63%.

What is the main difference between JMID and VOT?

They also come from different issuers: Janus Henderson and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for JMID and 0.05% for VOT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JMID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.86 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.