JEPI vs QQQ: Complete Comparison
JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust โ overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis
Visual Overlap
Price Performance
Historical price comparison over 3M
๐Performance Comparison
โ ๏ธRisk Metrics
Interpretation:
- ๐ Lower volatility = smoother ride
- โก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
- โ ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
- ๐ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500
โ๏ธHead-to-Head Comparison
๐ JEPI wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: JEPI wins with better number of holdings. Consider JEPI for your portfolio, but QQQ is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
28 shared holdings representing 22.0% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | JEPI Weight | QQQ Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GOOGL GOOGL | 1.67% | 3.58% | 1.67% |
| 2 | AMZN AMZN | 1.55% | 4.87% | 1.55% |
| 3 | NVDA NVDA | 1.51% | 8.99% | 1.51% |
| 4 | MSFT MSFT | 1.50% | 7.12% | 1.50% |
| 5 | AAPL AAPL | 1.48% | 7.94% | 1.48% |
| 6 | META META | 1.37% | 3.85% | 1.37% |
| 7 | PEP PEP | 1.27% | 1.06% | 1.06% |
| 8 | AVGO AVGO | 1.03% | 3.24% | 1.03% |
| 9 | INTU INTU | 1.29% | 1.02% | 1.02% |
| 10 | NFLX NFLX | 0.85% | 2.15% | 0.85% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in JEPI
Unique to JEPI
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| JNJ | JNJ | 1.63% |
| ABBV | ABBV | 1.62% |
| MGMXX | MGMXX | 1.62% |
| MA | MA | 1.55% |
| HWM | HWM | 1.51% |
Top Holdings Only in QQQ
Unique to QQQ
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| TSLA | TSLA | 4.21% |
| GOOG | GOOG | 3.35% |
| PLTR | PLTR | 2.40% |
| AMD | AMD | 1.90% |
| MU | MU | 1.75% |
Price Correlation
How We Calculate Overlap
We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:
Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holdingNormalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).
Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.
๐ This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.