PCSG vs. JHMM

Last updated Jul 4, 2026

PCSG (Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF) and JHMM (John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. PCSG is actively managed, while JHMM is passively managed. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PCSG charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.42%/yr for JHMM.

Performance

PCSG vs. JHMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF (PCSG) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PCSG

• 1D: -3.77%
• 1M: -5.56%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JHMM

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 1.28%
• 6M: 12.52%
• YTD: 14.05%
• 1Y: 20.30%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: 8.44%
• 10Y*: 12.02%

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

PCSG vs. JHMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
PCSG Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF	-0.46%
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF	5.18%

Correlation

The correlation between PCSG and JHMM is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 18, 2026	0.77

Return for Risk

PCSG vs. JHMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PCSG

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

JHMM

JHMM Risk / Return Rank: 55
JHMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
JHMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
JHMM Omega Ratio Rank: 48
JHMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
JHMM Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

PCSG vs. JHMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF (PCSG) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM). 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.

	PCSG	JHMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.47	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.14	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.26	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.44	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	9.40	—

Drawdowns

PCSG vs. JHMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCSG drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, smaller than the maximum JHMM drawdown of -40.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCSG and JHMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCSG	JHMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.02%	-40.71%	+31.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-8.64%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.88%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.10%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-40.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.24%	-0.76%	-6.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-5.40%	+2.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.24%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PCSG	JHMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.43%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.94%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.20%	14.40%	+22.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	37.20%	18.37%	+18.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.20%	19.54%	+17.66%

PCSG vs. JHMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCSG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than JHMM's 0.42% expense ratio.

Dividends

PCSG vs. JHMM - Dividend Comparison

PCSG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JHMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
JHMM John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF	0.88%	0.98%	1.01%	1.17%	1.16%	0.72%	1.04%	1.02%	1.36%	0.90%	1.15%	0.33%
PCSG Polen 5Perspectives Small-Mid Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCSG and JHMM in my portfolio?

PCSG and JHMM have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PCSG or JHMM?

On fees, JHMM is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCSG or JHMM?

JHMM is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for PCSG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCSG or JHMM?

JHMM has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.00% for PCSG.

What is the main difference between PCSG and JHMM?

They also come from different issuers: Polen and Manulife. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PCSG and 0.42% for JHMM.