JPMorgan Mid Cap Equity Fund earns an Above Average Process Pillar rating.
The most important driver of the rating is the fund's strong long-term risk-adjusted performance. This can be seen in its five-year alpha calculated relative to the category index, which suggests that the managers have shown skill in their allocation of risk. The parent firm's five-year risk-adjusted success ratio of 56% also strengthens the process. The measure indicates the percentage of a firm's funds that survived and beat their respective category's median Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return for the period. Their impressive success ratio suggests that the firm does well for investors and that this fund may benefit from that. Lastly, the process is limited by being an actively managed strategy. Historical data, such as Morningstar's Active/Passive Barometer, finds that actively managed funds have generally underperformed their passive counterparts, especially over longer time horizons.
This strategy leans toward larger, more growth-oriented companies compared with its average peer in the Mid-Cap Blend Morningstar Category. Analyzing additional factors, this strategy tilts consistently toward stocks with lower quality or the shares of companies with more financial leverage and lower profitability, compared with Morningstar Category peers over the past few years. Such positions do not tend to provide much ballast for a portfolio. In the latest month, the strategy was also less exposed to the Quality factor compared with Morningstar Category peers. This strategy's portfolio also has had exposure to more stocks with high dividend or buyback yields over peers in these years. High-yield stocks tend to be connected to more mature companies earning enough cash to return some to shareholders. At times, however, extreme market pressure can force them to cut their dividends, which hurts stock performance. Compared with category peers, the strategy also had more exposure to the Yield factor in the most recent month. Additionally, this strategy has tilted toward illiquid stocks during these years, evidenced by holding companies with relatively lower trading volumes than peers. Less-liquid stocks might offer strong returns to compensate for their risks, but they can be harder and more expensive to trade in bear markets. In recent months, the strategy also had less Liquidity factor exposure than its peers. More information on a fund and its respective category's factor exposure can be found in the Factor Profile module within the Portfolio section.
The portfolio is overweight in financial services by 3.1 percentage points in terms of assets compared with the category average, and its real estate allocation is similar to the category. The sectors with low exposure compared to category peers are basic materials and industrials; however, the allocations are similar to the category. The portfolio is composed of 201 holdings and is less top-heavy than peers. Specifically, 12.7% of the fund’s assets are concentrated within the top 10 fund holdings, as opposed to the category average's 15.4%. And finally, in terms of portfolio turnover, looking at year-over-year movements, 40% of the fund's holdings have changed, whether through increasing, decreasing, or changing a position.