GPTY vs JEPI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
GPTY and JEPI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. GPTY is YieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF, while JEPI is JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF. JEPI is broader by holdings count, with 136 positions versus 96 for GPTY. GPTY is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has JEPI ahead on AIQ Score, 67 versus 32.
What is the main difference between GPTY and JEPI?
GPTY puts 78% of its assets in Technology, while JEPI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 16%.
| Metric | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 1.06% | 0.35% |
| Holdings | 96 | 136 |
| Top-10 concentration | 48.5% | 18.1% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 39.32% | 7.96% |
| Average volume | 58,392 | 4,434,583 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -15.9% | +1.5% |
| YTD return | -6.2% | +0.2% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 28.2% | 8.4% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -29.8% | -7.7% |
| Beta | 1.80 | 0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.61 | -0.32 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.93 | -0.47 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 32/100 | 67/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 1/10 | 10/10 |
| Momentum | 24/100 | 79/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 34/100 | 74/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
YieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF vs JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF
JEPI leads
JEPI leads by 35 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 14 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 4 evidence groups support JEPI, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
YieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF
JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors JEPI over GPTY, 67 versus 32 as of Oct 21, 2026. JEPI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. JEPI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor JEPI today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the lead has swung materially session to session. JEPI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 35 points over 30 sessions. JEPI leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare YieldMax AI & Tech Portfolio Option Income ETF and JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
GPTY vs JEPI: 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 | GPTY | JEPI | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 1.06% | 0.35% | JEPI |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 96 | 136 | JEPI |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 48.5% | 18.1% | JEPI |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 39.32% | 7.96% | GPTY |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -29.8% | -7.7% | JEPI |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 28.2% | 8.4% | JEPI |
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 GPTY and JEPI 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.
- Momentum24 vs 79JEPI +55
- Risk Resilience34 vs 74JEPI +40
- Quality34 vs 68JEPI +34
- Value36 vs 51JEPI +15
4 of 4 evidence groups favor JEPI. JEPI’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Value -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: Momentum +13
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
JEPI's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — GPTY and JEPI 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 | GPTY | JEPI | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 1.06% | 0.35% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 96 | 136 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 58,392 | 4,434,583 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 28.2% | 8.4% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -29.8% | -7.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.61 | -0.32 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.80 | 0.42 | 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
GPTY and JEPI share 15.03% of their weighted exposure across 12 common holdings.
15 holdings are unique to GPTY, and 118 holdings are unique to JEPI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
GPTY is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 48.5% of the fund, against 18.06% for JEPI (96 holdings vs 136). 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 | GPTY | JEPI | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.53% | 1.94% | 1.94% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 4.5% | 1.9% | 1.9% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 4.04% | 1.89% | 1.89% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.14% | 1.86% | 1.86% |
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 6.31% | 1.83% | 1.83% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.13% | 1.71% | 1.71% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.57% | 1.63% | 1.63% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 4.33% | 1.04% | 1.04% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What GPTY adds that JEPI doesn’t
| Holding | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| SNOWSnowflake Inc | 6.4% | Not held |
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 6.31% | 1.83% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.13% | 1.71% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.53% | 1.94% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 4.5% | 1.9% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 4.5% | 0.25% |
What JEPI adds that GPTY doesn’t
| Holding | JEPI | GPTY |
|---|---|---|
| MAMASTERCARD INC COMMON | 1.78% | Not held |
| JNJJOHNSON & COMMON | 1.78% | Not held |
| NEENEXTERA ENERGY INC | 1.69% | Not held |
| TRANE TECHNOLOGIES PLC | 1.69% | Not held |
| ABBVABBVIE INC COMMON STOCK | 1.65% | Not held |
| EOGEOG RESOURCES INC COMMON | 1.61% | 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.
GPTY vs JEPI: five-year payout growth
JEPI grew its split-adjusted payout at 7.88% a year over 2020-2025. GPTY began paying distributions in 2025, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare. JEPI: The payout jumped 52.9% in 2022, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change.
| Dividend metric | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $14.514 | $4.720 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | #1 of 3 |
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 JEPI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | JEPI | 32 vs 67 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | JEPI | Value 36 vs 51 |
| Technicals | JEPI | Price vs 50-day -5.5% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day -5.3% vs 0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | JEPI | Risk Resilience 34 vs 74 |
| 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 GPTY and JEPI 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 35 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 widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has swung materially session to session. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 JEPI.
How the comparison changed
45 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 20JEPI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 35 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- JEPI +35
- 32 vs 67
- 7 sessions ago
- JEPI +29
- 32 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- JEPI +14
- 42 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only GPTY
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.89%)
- Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only JEPI
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.29%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.57%)
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze.
JEPI 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 +0.65%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.02%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1GPTY closes the Momentum gap — currently 55 points behind, the largest single contributor to JEPI's edge.
- 2GPTY's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3JEPI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
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
JEPI leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -6.3% | 0.8% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -10.1% | 1.1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.2% | 1.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -4% | -0.2% |
| Year to date | -6.2% | 0.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -15.9% | 1.5% |
Technicals
JEPI has the stronger structure| Metric | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 29.9 | 74.6 |
| ADX (14) | 19.9 | 20.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -5.5% | 0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.3% | 0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 24.2% | 5.4% |
Risk
JEPI is the more resilient| Metric | GPTY | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.8 | 0.42 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.61 | -0.32 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.93 | -0.47 |
| Max drawdown | -29.8% | -7.7% |
| Current drawdown | -21.4% | -4.2% |
| Annualized volatility | 28.2% | 8.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2.9% | -0.9% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between GPTY and JEPI?
GPTY puts 78% of its assets in Technology, while JEPI spreads across 11 sectors with none above 16%.
How much do GPTY and JEPI overlap?
GPTY and JEPI share 15.03% of their weighted exposure across 12 common holdings. 15 holdings are unique to GPTY, and 118 holdings are unique to JEPI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, GPTY or JEPI?
JEPI holds more positions: 136 versus 96 for GPTY.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
JEPI has the lower expense ratio, 0.35% a year against 1.06% for GPTY.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
GPTY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 39.32% against 7.96% for JEPI.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
GPTY has been more volatile over the past year, at 28.2% annualized against 8.4% for JEPI.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
JEPI fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -7.7% against -29.8% for GPTY.
Compare GPTY and JEPI 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.