MCDS vs. VFMV

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MCDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF) and VFMV (Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MCDS returned 22.27% vs 13.49% for VFMV. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MCDS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for VFMV.

Performance

MCDS vs. VFMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCDS achieves a 13.38% return, which is significantly higher than VFMV's 8.76% return.

MCDS

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

VFMV

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.96%
• YTD: 8.76%
• 6M: 8.41%
• 1Y: 13.49%
• 3Y*: 15.06%
• 5Y*: 9.87%
• 10Y*: —

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

MCDS vs. VFMV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF	13.38%	6.51%	9.83%
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	8.76%	10.52%	4.59%

Correlation

The correlation between MCDS and VFMV is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 9, 2024	0.81

The correlation between MCDS and VFMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCDS vs. VFMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCDS	VFMV
Industrials	18.2%	10.1%
Technology	17.3%	25.1%
Financial Services	13.5%	10.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	6.9%
Healthcare	8.9%	10.1%
Energy	7.2%	3.9%
Real Estate	7.1%	6.4%
Utilities	6.5%	6.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	9.5%
Basic Materials	4.1%	-
Communication Services	2.1%	10.7%

Return for Risk

MCDS vs. VFMV — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCDS

MCDS Risk / Return Rank: 55
MCDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
MCDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
MCDS Omega Ratio Rank: 48
MCDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
MCDS Martin Ratio Rank: 62

VFMV

VFMV Risk / Return Rank: 47
VFMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
VFMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
VFMV Omega Ratio Rank: 43
VFMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
VFMV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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. VFMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV). 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	VFMV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.69	1.54	+0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	2.24	+0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.27	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.99	2.26	+0.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.12	8.85	+2.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MCDS vs. VFMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCDS Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the VFMV Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCDS and VFMV, 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

	MCDS	VFMV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.69	1.54	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.84	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	0.70	+0.30

Drawdowns

MCDS vs. VFMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCDS drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, smaller than the maximum VFMV drawdown of -33.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCDS and VFMV.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCDS	VFMV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.50%	-33.64%	+11.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.47%	-6.00%	-1.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.35%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.81%	+0.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.98%	-3.64%	-0.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.01%	1.53%	+0.48%

Volatility

MCDS vs. VFMV - Volatility Comparison

JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) has a higher volatility of 3.25% compared to Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) at 2.04%. This indicates that MCDS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VFMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCDS	VFMV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.25%	2.04%	+1.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.86%	6.30%	+3.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.21%	8.80%	+4.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.94%	11.75%	+5.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.94%	14.25%	+2.69%

MCDS vs. VFMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCDS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than VFMV's 0.13% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCDS vs. VFMV - Dividend Comparison

MCDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than VFMV's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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%
VFMV Vanguard U.S. Minimum Volatility ETF	1.93%	2.12%	1.46%	2.20%	2.08%	1.31%	2.14%	2.43%	2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCDS and VFMV in my portfolio?

MCDS and VFMV have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCDS or VFMV?

MCDS has higher volatility (3.25%) compared to VFMV (2.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCDS dropped -22.50% vs VFMV's -33.64%.

Which ETF is better, MCDS or VFMV?

On 1-year performance, MCDS leads with 22.27% vs 13.49% for VFMV. On fees, VFMV is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, VFMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCDS or VFMV?

Over the 1-year period, MCDS has performed better with a 22.27% return vs 13.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCDS or VFMV?

VFMV is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MCDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MCDS or VFMV?

VFMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 1.06% for MCDS.

What is the main difference between MCDS and VFMV?

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCDS and 0.13% for VFMV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.54), 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.