JPIE vs MBB: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
JPIE and MBB are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. JPIE is JPMorgan Income ETF, while MBB is iShares MBS ETF. MBB is broader by holdings count, with 11,209 positions versus 2,747 for JPIE. JPIE is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has MBB ahead on AIQ Score, 61 versus 51.
What is the main difference between JPIE and MBB?
MBB holds 11,209 positions to JPIE's 2,747, and 3% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | JPIE | MBB |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.04% |
| Holdings | 2,747 | 11,209 |
| Top-10 concentration | 21.4% | 5.8% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 5.7% | 4.5% |
| Average volume | 1,657,244 | 3,855,988 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -3.1% | -5.6% |
| YTD return | -3% | -5% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +3.1% | -0.1% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 2.4% | 5.1% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -4% | -8.1% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -10% | -16.8% |
| Beta | 0.07 | 0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.95 | -1.90 |
| Sortino ratio | -3.17 | -2.68 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 51/100 | 61/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 4/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 44/100 | 55/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 77/100 | 87/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
JPMorgan Income ETF vs iShares MBS ETF
MBB leads
MBB leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the lead has widened from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support MBB, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
JPMorgan Income ETF
iShares MBS ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MBB over JPIE, 61 versus 51 as of Oct 21, 2026. MBB's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience. MBB also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MBB today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. MBB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 10 points over 30 sessions. MBB 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 JPMorgan Income ETF and iShares MBS ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
JPIE vs MBB: 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 | JPIE | MBB | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.4% | 0.04% | MBB |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 2,747 | 11,209 | MBB |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 21.4% | 5.8% | MBB |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 5.7% | 4.5% | JPIE |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -10% | -16.8% | JPIE |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 2.4% | 5.1% | JPIE |
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 JPIE and MBB 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.
- Momentum44 vs 55MBB +11
- Risk Resilience77 vs 87MBB +10
- Quality59 vs 68MBB +9
- Value36 vs 45MBB +9
3 of 4 evidence groups favor MBB. MBB’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: Momentum +5
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
MBB's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — JPIE and MBB 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 | JPIE | MBB | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.04% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 2,747 | 11,209 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 1,657,244 | 3,855,988 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 2.4% | 5.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -4% | -8.1% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.95 | -1.90 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.07 | 0.16 | 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
JPIE and MBB share 2.93% of their weighted exposure across 20 common holdings.
2,536 holdings are unique to JPIE, and 11,134 holdings are unique to MBB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
JPIE is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 21.43% of the fund, against 5.82% for MBB (2,747 holdings vs 11,209). 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 | JPIE | MBB | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| TBA UMBS SINGLE 5.5% | 3.83% | 0.79% | 0.79% |
| TBA UMBS SINGLE FAMILY 5% | 4.34% | 0.67% | 0.67% |
| TBA GNMA2 SINGLE 4.5% | 2.04% | 0.43% | 0.43% |
| TBA UMBS SINGLE FAMILY 6% | 0.69% | 0.29% | 0.29% |
| TBA UMBS SINGLE 4.5% | 0.56% | 0.15% | 0.15% |
| GNMA II 5.5% 01/56 | 1% | 0.11% | 0.11% |
| TBA GNMA2 SINGLE 6.5% | 2.69% | 0.1% | 0.1% |
| GNMA II MORTPASS 6% 05/56 | 0.27% | 0.09% | 0.09% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What JPIE adds that MBB doesn’t
| Holding | JPIE | MBB |
|---|---|---|
| TBA UMBS SINGLE FAMILY 5% | 4.34% | 0.67% |
| TBA UMBS SINGLE 5.5% | 3.83% | 0.79% |
| TBA GNMA2 SINGLE 6.5% | 2.69% | 0.1% |
| JPMORGAN PRIME MONEY | 2.22% | Not held |
| TBA GNMA2 SINGLE 4.5% | 2.04% | 0.43% |
| GNMA II MORTPASS 6% 06/56 | 1.53% | 0.04% |
What MBB adds that JPIE doesn’t
| Holding | MBB | JPIE |
|---|---|---|
| FHLMC 30YR UMBS SUPER 2.00% 05/01/2051 | 0.87% | Not held |
| GNMA2 30YR TBA(REG C) 5.50% 09/21/2026 | 0.63% | Not held |
| GNMA2 30YR TBA(REG C) 6.00% 09/21/2026 | 0.56% | Not held |
| GNMA2 30YR TBA(REG C) 5.00% 09/21/2026 | 0.49% | Not held |
| GNMA2 30YR 5.00% 11/20/2054 | 0.49% | Not held |
| GNMA2 30YR 2.00% 10/20/2051 | 0.45% | 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.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor MBB. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MBB | 51 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | MBB | Value 36 vs 45 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -1% vs -1%; vs 200-day -2.2% vs -3.7% |
| Risk Resilience | MBB | Risk Resilience 77 vs 87 |
| 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 JPIE and MBB and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 10 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 MBB.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20MBB lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MBB +10
- 51 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- MBB +9
- 49 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- MBB +7
- 46 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- Level
- 55 vs 55
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Aug 28 when MBB moved ahead of JPIE.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only MBB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 5 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, 52-Week Low Proximity, Downtrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
MBB 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 -0.02%, AIQ +1 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.06%, 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.
- 1JPIE closes the Momentum gap — currently 11 points behind, the largest single contributor to MBB's edge.
- 2JPIE's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MBB's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 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
JPIE leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | JPIE | MBB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0.3% | 0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.9% | -1% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -2% | -2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -2.7% | -4.8% |
| Year to date | -3% | -5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -3.1% | -5.6% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | JPIE | MBB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 52.3 | 64.7 |
| ADX (14) | 48 | 34.6 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1% | -1% |
| Price vs 200-day | -2.2% | -3.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 2.9% | 7% |
Risk
MBB is the more resilient| Metric | JPIE | MBB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.07 | 0.16 |
| Sharpe ratio | -2.95 | -1.9 |
| Sortino ratio | -3.17 | -2.68 |
| Max drawdown | -4% | -8.1% |
| Current drawdown | -3.5% | -6.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 2.4% | 5.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -0.3% | -0.5% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between JPIE and MBB?
MBB holds 11,209 positions to JPIE's 2,747, and 3% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do JPIE and MBB overlap?
JPIE and MBB share 2.93% of their weighted exposure across 20 common holdings. 2,536 holdings are unique to JPIE, and 11,134 holdings are unique to MBB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, JPIE or MBB?
MBB holds more positions: 11,209 versus 2,747 for JPIE.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
MBB has the lower expense ratio, 0.04% a year against 0.4% for JPIE.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
JPIE, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 5.7% against 4.5% for MBB.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
MBB has been more volatile over the past year, at 5.1% annualized against 2.4% for JPIE.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
JPIE fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -10% against -16.8% for MBB.
Compare JPIE and MBB 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.