FEPI vs JEPQ: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
FEPI and JEPQ are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. FEPI is REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF, while JEPQ is JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF. JEPQ is broader by holdings count, with 110 positions versus 66 for FEPI. FEPI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has JEPQ ahead on AIQ Score, 54 versus 42.
What is the main difference between FEPI and JEPQ?
FEPI and JEPQ both concentrate in Technology, at 68% and 61% of assets, and 41% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.35% |
| Holdings | 66 | 110 |
| Top-10 concentration | 66.5% | 42.6% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 26.4% | 11.58% |
| Average volume | 201,586 | 6,194,078 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -12.2% | +4.1% |
| YTD return | -9% | +2.3% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 15.1% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -23.3% | -10.3% |
| Beta | 1.30 | 1.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.75 | 0.04 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.14 | 0.05 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 42/100 | 54/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 2/10 | 5/10 |
| Momentum | 29/100 | 31/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 75/100 | 80/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF vs JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
JEPQ leads
JEPQ leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value, but the lead has narrowed from 16 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 4 evidence groups support JEPQ, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF
JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JEPQ over FEPI, 54 versus 42 as of Oct 21, 2026. JEPQ's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value. JEPQ also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor JEPQ today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. JEPQ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare REX FANG & Innovation Equity Premium Income ETF and JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
FEPI vs JEPQ: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | FEPI | JEPQ | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.65% | 0.35% | JEPQ |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 66 | 110 | JEPQ |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 66.5% | 42.6% | JEPQ |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 26.4% | 11.58% | FEPI |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -23.3% | -10.3% | JEPQ |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 20.6% | 15.1% | JEPQ |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare FEPI and JEPQ against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality45 vs 69JEPQ +24
- Value33 vs 45JEPQ +12
- Risk Resilience75 vs 80JEPQ +5
- Momentum29 vs 31Even
4 of 4 evidence groups favor JEPQ. JEPQ’s edge is concentrated in quality and value.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Quality +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Value -1
New signals
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
JEPQ's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FEPI and JEPQ both carry a full feed there.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | FEPI | JEPQ | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.35% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 66 | 110 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 201,586 | 6,194,078 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 15.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -23.3% | -10.3% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.75 | 0.04 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.30 | 1.04 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
How much of the same holdings they own
FEPI and JEPQ share 41.34% of their weighted exposure across 14 common holdings.
9 holdings are unique to FEPI, and 92 holdings are unique to JEPQ. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
FEPI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 66.52% of the fund, against 42.65% for JEPQ (66 holdings vs 110). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | FEPI | JEPQ | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLAPPLE INC COMMON STOCK | 6.6% | 6.63% | 6.6% |
| NVDANVIDIA CORP COMMON STOCK | 6.25% | 7.22% | 6.25% |
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 6.41% | 5.16% | 5.16% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC | 6.6% | 4.67% | 4.67% |
| AMZNAMAZON.COM INC | 6.07% | 3.94% | 3.94% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC | 6.64% | 3.4% | 3.4% |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 7.37% | 2.71% | 2.71% |
| TSLATesla Inc. | 6.79% | 2.08% | 2.08% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What FEPI adds that JEPQ doesn’t
| Holding | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 7.37% | 2.71% |
| TSLATesla Inc. | 6.79% | 2.08% |
| ORCLORACLE CORP | 6.67% | 0.2% |
| SNDKSANDISK CORP/DE SNDKV | 6.61% | 0.63% |
| INTCINTEL CORP | 6.58% | 1.19% |
| GOOGLALPHABET INC-CL A | 6.07% | Not held |
What JEPQ adds that FEPI doesn’t
| Holding | JEPQ | FEPI |
|---|---|---|
| GOOGALPHABET INC-CL C - | 4.77% | Not held |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH CORP COMMON | 1.98% | Not held |
| WMTWALMART INC COMMON STOCK | 1.67% | Not held |
| STXSEAGATE TECHNOLOGY | 1.66% | Not held |
| JPMORGAN PRIME MONEY | 1.4% | Not held |
| CSCOCISCO SYSTEMS INC COMMON | 1.26% | Not held |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
FEPI vs JEPQ: five-year payout growth
FEPI began paying distributions in 2023, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. JEPQ began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $11.608 | $6.123 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | not ranked |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor JEPQ. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JEPQ | 42 vs 54 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | JEPQ | Value 33 vs 45 |
| Technicals | JEPQ | Price vs 50-day -2.1% vs -0.4%; vs 200-day -3% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | JEPQ | Risk Resilience 75 vs 80 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FEPI and JEPQ and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on JEPQ.
How the comparison changed
45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20JEPQ lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 16 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- JEPQ +12
- 42 vs 54
- 7 sessions ago
- JEPQ +13
- 42 vs 55
- 30 sessions ago
- JEPQ +16
- 49 vs 65
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Sep 7 when FEPI moved ahead of JEPQ.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
0 bullish / 4 bearish / 1 neutral
Only FEPI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.71%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only JEPQ
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.94%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.04%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
JEPQ leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.22%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +0.86%, AIQ -1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1FEPI closes the Quality gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to JEPQ's edge.
- 2FEPI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3JEPQ's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 4 points over 30 sessions, and a further 12-point move would eliminate JEPQ's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
JEPQ leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -4.3% | -2.4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.8% | -2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.3% | 0% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -3.9% | 1.4% |
| Year to date | -9% | 2.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.2% | 4.1% |
Technicals
JEPQ has the stronger structure| Metric | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 36.4 | 29.6 |
| ADX (14) | 20.9 | 21.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.1% | -0.4% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 17.4% | 10.8% |
Risk
JEPQ is the more resilient| Metric | FEPI | JEPQ |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.3 | 1.04 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.75 | 0.04 |
| Sortino ratio | -1.14 | 0.05 |
| Max drawdown | -23.3% | -10.3% |
| Current drawdown | -16.4% | -3.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 15.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.2% | -1.7% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between FEPI and JEPQ?
FEPI and JEPQ both concentrate in Technology, at 68% and 61% of assets, and 41% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do FEPI and JEPQ overlap?
FEPI and JEPQ share 41.34% of their weighted exposure across 14 common holdings. 9 holdings are unique to FEPI, and 92 holdings are unique to JEPQ. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Which ETF is more diversified, FEPI or JEPQ?
JEPQ holds more positions: 110 versus 66 for FEPI.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
JEPQ has the lower expense ratio, 0.35% a year against 0.65% for FEPI.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
FEPI, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 26.4% against 11.58% for JEPQ.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
FEPI has been more volatile over the past year, at 20.6% annualized against 15.1% for JEPQ.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
JEPQ fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -10.3% against -23.3% for FEPI.
Compare FEPI and JEPQ with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.