PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MCDS vs. EUSA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MCDS vs. EUSA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCDS achieves a 13.38% return, which is significantly higher than EUSA's 10.04% return.


MCDS

1D
0.44%
1M
3.13%
YTD
13.38%
6M
13.62%
1Y
22.27%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

EUSA

1D
0.81%
1M
3.88%
YTD
10.04%
6M
10.00%
1Y
19.17%
3Y*
16.37%
5Y*
7.90%
10Y*
11.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MCDS vs. EUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MCDS
JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF
13.38%6.51%9.83%
EUSA
iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF
10.04%10.24%8.15%

Correlation

The correlation between MCDS and EUSA is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2024

0.96

The correlation between MCDS and EUSA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCDS vs. EUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MCDS
EUSA

Industrials

18.2%
14.7%

Technology

17.3%
21.3%

Financial Services

13.5%
14.4%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
9.7%

Healthcare

8.9%
10.1%

Energy

7.2%
4.6%

Real Estate

7.1%
5.5%

Utilities

6.5%
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
5.2%

Basic Materials

4.1%
4.1%

Communication Services

2.1%
4.8%

Industrials

MCDS
18.2%
EUSA
14.7%

Technology

MCDS
17.3%
EUSA
21.3%

Financial Services

MCDS
13.5%
EUSA
14.4%

Consumer Cyclical

MCDS
11.1%
EUSA
9.7%

Healthcare

MCDS
8.9%
EUSA
10.1%

Energy

MCDS
7.2%
EUSA
4.6%

Real Estate

MCDS
7.1%
EUSA
5.5%

Utilities

MCDS
6.5%
EUSA
5.6%

Consumer Defensive

MCDS
4.2%
EUSA
5.2%

Basic Materials

MCDS
4.1%
EUSA
4.1%

Communication Services

MCDS
2.1%
EUSA
4.8%

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

MCDS vs. EUSA — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCDS
MCDS Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
MCDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MCDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
MCDS Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
MCDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
MCDS Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank

EUSA
EUSA Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
EUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
EUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
EUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
EUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

MCDS vs. EUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA). 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.


MCDSEUSADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.28

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.99

2.46

+0.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.12

9.76

+1.36

MCDS vs. EUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCDS Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the EUSA Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCDS and EUSA, 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


MCDSEUSADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.69

1.63

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.00

0.71

+0.29

Drawdowns

MCDS vs. EUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCDS drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, smaller than the maximum EUSA drawdown of -39.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCDS and EUSA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MCDSEUSADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.50%

-39.16%

+16.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.47%

-7.82%

+0.35%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.20%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.24%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.98%

-4.59%

+0.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.01%

1.97%

+0.04%

Volatility

MCDS vs. EUSA - Volatility Comparison

JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) has a higher volatility of 3.25% compared to iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF (EUSA) at 2.93%. This indicates that MCDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MCDSEUSADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.25%

2.93%

+0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.86%

8.75%

+1.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.21%

11.80%

+1.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.94%

16.95%

-0.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.94%

18.34%

-1.40%

MCDS vs. EUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCDS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than EUSA's 0.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

MCDS vs. EUSA - Dividend Comparison

MCDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than EUSA's 1.51% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
EUSA
iShares MSCI USA Equal Weighted ETF
1.51%1.63%1.47%1.53%1.73%1.23%1.45%1.49%2.01%1.50%1.59%2.21%
MCDS
JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF
1.06%1.23%0.64%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, MCDS and EUSA 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.

MCDS has higher volatility (3.25%) compared to EUSA (2.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCDS dropped -22.50% vs EUSA's -39.16%.

On 1-year performance, MCDS leads with 22.27% vs 19.17% for EUSA. On fees, EUSA is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, EUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MCDS has performed better with a 22.27% return vs 19.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EUSA is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MCDS.

EUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 1.06% for MCDS.

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCDS and 0.09% for EUSA.

MCDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.63), 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 MCDS and EUSA

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