PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RFV vs. JHMM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RFV vs. JHMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with RFV having a 13.04% return and JHMM slightly lower at 12.60%. Over the past 10 years, RFV has outperformed JHMM with an annualized return of 12.53%, while JHMM has yielded a comparatively lower 11.88% annualized return.


RFV

1D
-0.36%
1M
3.75%
YTD
13.04%
6M
10.71%
1Y
25.06%
3Y*
16.77%
5Y*
10.00%
10Y*
12.53%

JHMM

1D
-0.24%
1M
3.21%
YTD
12.60%
6M
13.14%
1Y
24.83%
3Y*
17.01%
5Y*
8.39%
10Y*
11.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RFV vs. JHMM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
13.04%7.66%5.63%30.26%-3.99%33.02%9.61%24.98%-18.56%14.74%
JHMM
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF
12.60%10.73%14.61%14.53%-15.30%24.54%16.22%30.01%-9.57%19.96%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and JHMM is 0.82, 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

0.82

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.89

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.90

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2015

0.86

The correlation between RFV and JHMM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFV vs. JHMM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RFV
JHMM

Consumer Cyclical

24.4%
11.0%

Financial Services

17.5%
15.3%

Energy

12.9%
5.4%

Technology

12.9%
17.2%

Industrials

11.4%
19.4%

Consumer Defensive

9.1%
3.7%

Basic Materials

7.6%
4.2%

Real Estate

3.5%
5.4%

Healthcare

0.7%
10.2%

Communication Services

-

2.7%

Utilities

-

5.4%

Consumer Cyclical

RFV
24.4%
JHMM
11.0%

Financial Services

RFV
17.5%
JHMM
15.3%

Energy

RFV
12.9%
JHMM
5.4%

Technology

RFV
12.9%
JHMM
17.2%

Industrials

RFV
11.4%
JHMM
19.4%

Consumer Defensive

RFV
9.1%
JHMM
3.7%

Basic Materials

RFV
7.6%
JHMM
4.2%

Real Estate

RFV
3.5%
JHMM
5.4%

Healthcare

RFV
0.7%
JHMM
10.2%

Communication Services

RFV

-

JHMM
2.7%

Utilities

RFV

-

JHMM
5.4%

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

RFV vs. JHMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFV
RFV Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

JHMM
JHMM Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
JHMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JHMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5252
Sortino Ratio Rank
JHMM Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
JHMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
JHMM Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

RFV vs. JHMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) 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.


RFVJHMMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.31

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

2.89

-0.87

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.94

11.17

-5.23

RFV vs. JHMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is comparable to the JHMM Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and JHMM, 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


RFVJHMMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.39

1.77

-0.38

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.46

0.46

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.50

0.61

-0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.63

-0.25

Drawdowns

RFV vs. JHMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than JHMM's maximum drawdown of -40.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and JHMM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RFVJHMMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-71.82%

-40.71%

-31.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.51%

-8.64%

-3.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.65%

-21.88%

-2.77%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.65%

-24.10%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-52.24%

-40.71%

-11.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.36%

-0.24%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.79%

-5.43%

-4.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.23%

2.23%

+2.00%

Volatility

RFV vs. JHMM - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) has a higher volatility of 4.60% compared to John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF (JHMM) at 3.81%. This indicates that RFV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JHMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RFVJHMMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.60%

3.81%

+0.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.86%

10.47%

+1.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.13%

14.12%

+4.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.08%

18.32%

+3.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.99%

19.60%

+5.39%

RFV vs. JHMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than JHMM's 0.42% expense ratio.


Dividends

RFV vs. JHMM - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than JHMM's 0.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
JHMM
John Hancock Multifactor Mid Cap ETF
0.87%0.98%1.01%1.17%1.16%0.72%1.04%1.02%1.36%0.90%1.15%0.33%
RFV
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF
1.84%2.07%1.31%1.27%2.05%1.60%1.52%1.71%1.39%1.36%0.88%1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


RFV and JHMM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RFV has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to JHMM (3.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs JHMM's -40.71%.

On 10-year performance, RFV leads with 12.53% vs 11.88% for JHMM. On fees, RFV is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, JHMM has been the lower-risk option at 3.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RFV has performed better with a 12.53% return vs 11.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RFV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for JHMM.

RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.87% for JHMM.

RFV is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while JHMM is Mid Cap Growth Equities. RFV tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Value, while JHMM tracks John Hancock Dimensional Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Manulife. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.42% for JHMM.

JHMM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.39), 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 RFV and JHMM

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