MCSFX vs. HFQAX

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MCSFX (MFS Commodity Strategy Fund) and HFQAX (Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund) are both mutual funds - MCSFX is a Commodities fund managed by MFS, while HFQAX is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund managed by Janus Henderson. Over the past 5 years, MCSFX returned 9.32%/yr vs 10.94%/yr for HFQAX. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MCSFX charges 1.89%/yr vs 1.24%/yr for HFQAX.

Performance

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) and Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MCSFX achieves a 15.00% return, which is significantly higher than HFQAX's 13.36% return.

MCSFX

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: -7.59%
• YTD: 15.00%
• 6M: 13.42%
• 1Y: 23.81%
• 3Y*: 12.27%
• 5Y*: 9.32%
• 10Y*: —

HFQAX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 2.38%
• YTD: 13.36%
• 6M: 13.67%
• 1Y: 26.91%
• 3Y*: 18.51%
• 5Y*: 10.94%
• 10Y*: 9.28%

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

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
MCSFX MFS Commodity Strategy Fund	15.00%	17.09%	4.32%	-7.25%	12.27%	26.40%	-1.34%	-1.69%
HFQAX Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund	13.36%	29.61%	6.86%	10.17%	-6.59%	12.45%	1.66%	8.57%

Correlation

The correlation between MCSFX and HFQAX is 0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2019	0.30

Over the past year, the correlation between MCSFX and HFQAX has dropped to 0.08 - well below their long-term average of 0.30, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

MCSFX vs. HFQAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCSFX

MCSFX Risk / Return Rank: 32
MCSFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
MCSFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
MCSFX Omega Ratio Rank: 29
MCSFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
MCSFX Martin Ratio Rank: 40

HFQAX

HFQAX Risk / Return Rank: 66
HFQAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
HFQAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
HFQAX Omega Ratio Rank: 75
HFQAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
HFQAX Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) and Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX). 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.

	MCSFX	HFQAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	2.36	-0.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.91	3.18	-1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.45	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.18	2.76	-0.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.17	9.85	-1.67

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCSFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the HFQAX Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCSFX and HFQAX, 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

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCSFX drawdown since its inception was -37.16%, smaller than the maximum HFQAX drawdown of -52.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCSFX and HFQAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCSFX	HFQAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.16%	-52.77%	+15.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.39%	-9.99%	-0.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.39%	-12.20%	+1.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.16%	-21.83%	-15.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.39%	-0.61%	-9.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.20%	-10.84%	-7.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.93%	2.80%	+0.13%

Volatility

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) is 3.33%, while Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund (HFQAX) has a volatility of 3.73%. This indicates that MCSFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HFQAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCSFX	HFQAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.33%	3.73%	-0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.81%	9.87%	+3.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.95%	11.69%	+4.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.13%	13.07%	+21.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.48%	14.71%	+14.77%

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCSFX has a 1.89% expense ratio, which is higher than HFQAX's 1.24% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCSFX vs. HFQAX - Dividend Comparison

MCSFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.08%, more than HFQAX's 5.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HFQAX Janus Henderson Global Equity Income Fund	5.88%	6.59%	7.96%	7.89%	8.02%	6.92%	7.25%	6.80%	7.66%	6.03%	6.77%	6.60%
MCSFX MFS Commodity Strategy Fund	13.08%	15.05%	2.25%	1.04%	26.24%	54.80%	0.15%	0.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCSFX and HFQAX in my portfolio?

MCSFX and HFQAX have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCSFX or HFQAX?

HFQAX has higher volatility (3.73%) compared to MCSFX (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCSFX dropped -37.16% vs HFQAX's -52.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HFQAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 1.42), 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.