MCDS vs. FTDS
MCDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF) and FTDS (First Trust Dividend Strength ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. MCDS is actively managed, while FTDS is passively managed. Over the past year, MCDS returned 22.27% vs 19.84% for FTDS. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCDS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for FTDS.
Performance
MCDS vs. FTDS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MCDS achieves a 13.38% return, which is significantly higher than FTDS's 7.45% return.
MCDS
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- 3.13%
- YTD
- 13.38%
- 6M
- 13.62%
- 1Y
- 22.27%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FTDS
- 1D
- 0.85%
- 1M
- -1.71%
- YTD
- 7.45%
- 6M
- 7.32%
- 1Y
- 19.84%
- 3Y*
- 16.73%
- 5Y*
- 6.50%
- 10Y*
- 10.84%
MCDS vs. FTDS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF | 13.38% | 6.51% | 9.83% |
FTDS First Trust Dividend Strength ETF | 7.45% | 13.64% | 3.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCDS and FTDS is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2024 | 0.80 |
The correlation between MCDS and FTDS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
MCDS vs. FTDS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MCDS
FTDS
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
Industrials
MCDS
FTDS
Technology
MCDS
FTDS
Financial Services
MCDS
FTDS
Consumer Cyclical
MCDS
FTDS
Healthcare
MCDS
FTDS
Energy
MCDS
FTDS
Real Estate
MCDS
FTDS
-
Utilities
MCDS
FTDS
-
Consumer Defensive
MCDS
FTDS
Basic Materials
MCDS
FTDS
Communication Services
MCDS
FTDS
-
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. FTDS — Risk / Return Rank
MCDS
FTDS
MCDS vs. FTDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS). 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.
| MCDS | FTDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.27 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.99 | 3.03 | -0.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.12 | 8.12 | +3.00 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCDS | FTDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.69 | 1.55 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.37 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.54 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 0.32 | +0.68 |
Drawdowns
MCDS vs. FTDS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MCDS drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, smaller than the maximum FTDS drawdown of -56.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCDS and FTDS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCDS | FTDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.50% | -56.53% | +34.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.47% | -6.57% | -0.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.04% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.35% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.47% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -3.65% | +3.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.98% | -9.87% | +5.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 2.45% | -0.44% |
Volatility
MCDS vs. FTDS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) is 3.25%, while First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS) has a volatility of 3.58%. This indicates that MCDS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FTDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCDS | FTDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.25% | 3.58% | -0.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.86% | 8.90% | +0.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.21% | 12.90% | +0.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.94% | 17.65% | -0.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.94% | 20.14% | -3.20% |
MCDS vs. FTDS - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCDS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FTDS's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCDS vs. FTDS - Dividend Comparison
MCDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than FTDS's 1.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTDS First Trust Dividend Strength ETF | 1.64% | 1.59% | 2.05% | 2.15% | 2.31% | 0.72% | 0.99% | 1.13% | 1.14% | 0.79% | 1.24% | 0.95% |
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
MCDS and FTDS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FTDS has higher volatility (3.58%) compared to MCDS (3.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCDS dropped -22.50% vs FTDS's -56.53%.
On 1-year performance, MCDS leads with 22.27% vs 19.84% for FTDS. On fees, MCDS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, MCDS has been the lower-risk option at 3.25%. 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 19.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MCDS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FTDS.
FTDS has the higher dividend yield at 1.64%, compared with 1.06% for MCDS.
They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCDS and 0.70% for FTDS.
MCDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.55), 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.
Find the right allocation for MCDS and FTDS
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