How do the expense ratios of JQUA and SPMO differ, and what does this mean for my returns?

JQUA charges a 0.12% expense ratio, while SPMO charges 0.13%. This 0.01 percentage point difference is minimal. For a $10,000 investment, JQUA would cost $12 annually, whereas SPMO would cost $13. While both fees are low, consistently lower costs can slightly improve net returns over time, all else being equal. Investors often prioritise low fees to maximise long-term growth potential, but this specific 0.01% gap is unlikely to be the deciding factor for most.

What do the terms 'quality factor' and 'momentum strategy' actually mean in the context of these ETFs?

Quality factor, associated with JQUA, typically focuses on companies with strong fundamentals like consistent earnings and manageable debt. Momentum strategy, seen in SPMO, involves selecting stocks showing strong recent price performance, assuming this trend continues. These are distinct investment philosophies; one looks at intrinsic business health, while the other analyses market sentiment and price trends. Understanding these definitions helps clarify why their portfolios and performance metrics might differ significantly over time.

How do the dividend yields of JQUA and SPMO compare, and what should beginners expect?

JQUA offers a dividend yield of 1.05%, whereas SPMO provides a lower yield of 0.72%. For income-focused investors, JQUA’s higher yield might be more appealing, generating $105 annually on a $10,000 investment compared to $72 for SPMO. However, yield is just one component of total return. Beginners should note that neither fund is specifically designed as a high-income vehicle, and yields can fluctuate based on the underlying companies' dividend policies and share prices.

What is the significance of the net asset bases of JQUA ($9.3bn) and SPMO ($28.9bn)?

Net assets indicate a fund’s size and market presence. SPMO’s $28.9 billion base is significantly larger than JQUA’s $9.3 billion. Larger funds generally offer higher liquidity, meaning they are easier to buy and sell without affecting the share price. While JQUA is still a substantial and reputable fund, SPMO’s greater scale might appeal to investors who prioritise trading ease and institutional adoption. Both figures suggest healthy investor interest in US large-cap strategies.

How do the top holdings of JQUA and SPMO overlap, and why does this matter?

Both funds share several top-10 holdings, including AMD, MU, AVGO, NVDA, GOOGL, and XOM. This overlap suggests that both quality and momentum strategies are currently converging on similar large-cap technology and semiconductor companies. However, the weightings differ significantly; for instance, MU accounts for 11.09% of SPMO but only 2.01% of JQUA. This concentration in SPMO indicates a stronger bias toward specific momentum-driven stocks, affecting risk profiles differently than the more diversified top holdings in JQUA.

Why are sector weights listed as 'not available' for both JQUA and SPMO, and how does this affect analysis?

The 'not available' sector weights mean that a detailed breakdown of how these funds allocate assets across industries like technology, healthcare, or energy is missing from the provided data. For beginners, this limits the ability to instantly assess diversification or sector concentration risks. While top holdings give some insight, sector data helps understand broader economic exposure. Investors may need to consult additional fund documentation to fully grasp the underlying industry distribution of these ETFs.

How does the inception date of each fund impact the evaluation of its performance?

SPMO was launched in October 2015, giving it an eight-year track record as of 2023/2024 data, while JQUA started in November 2017. A longer history allows investors to observe how the fund performs across more market cycles, including downturns and recoveries. SPMO’s earlier start provides slightly more historical data for analysis. JQUA, though newer, still has a multi-year track record, which is increasingly valuable for evaluating its quality-focused approach in various market conditions.

What does the index tracked being 'not available' imply for these ETFs?

Both JQUA and SPMO list their tracked index as 'not available' in this dataset. Usually, ETFs passively track a specific benchmark, which defines their strategy. The lack of this information means investors cannot instantly verify the exact methodology or selection criteria used by the fund managers. It requires looking at the fund prospectus to understand if the strategies are truly passive or involve active quantitative overlays, which impacts transparency and reproducibility of performance.

Is the concentration in SPMO's top holding (MU at 11.09%) a significant risk compared to JQUA?

Yes, potentially. SPMO has Micron Technology (MU) as its top holding at 11.09%, followed closely by NVDA at 9.02%. In contrast, JQUA’s top holding is Apple (AAPL) at just 2.11%, with a very evenly distributed top ten. High single-stock concentration in SPMO means its performance is more sensitive to the success or failure of that specific company. JQUA’s lower weights suggest a more diversified approach to single-stock risk, even if the sector exposure is unknown.

JQUA vs SPMO

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare JQUA (JP Morgan US Quality Factor ETF) and SPMO (Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF) to understand differences in fees, holdings, dividends and market tracking. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

JQUA

Metric

SPMO

0.12%

Expense Ratio

0.13%

1.05%

Dividend Yield

0.72%

$9.28B

Net Assets

$28.85B

312

Holdings

102

Nov 8, 2017

Inception Date

Oct 9, 2015

–

Index Tracked

–

Large Blend

Fund Category

Large Blend

JQUA costs about $1.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	JQUA	SPMO
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc.	2.07%	4.49%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.	2.01%	11.09%
AVGOBroadcom Inc.	2.01%	6.05%
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	1.94%	9.02%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.	1.87%	4.51%
XOMExxonMobil Holdings Corporation	1.79%	3.21%

Discover More Comparisons

JQUA vs SPYM

Compare JQUA and SPYM ETFs. Review fees, holdings, dividends, and tracking. JQUA charges 0.12% with $9.3bn assets; SPYM charges 0.02% with $157.4bn.

JQUA vs SPY

Compare JQUA and SPY ETFs. Review expense ratios, top holdings, dividend yields and tracking methods to understand their structural differences and costs.

JQUA vs SPHQ

Compare JQUA and SPHQ ETFs on fees, holdings, and dividends. JQUA charges 0.12% while SPHQ is 0.15%, both targeting quality in large-cap stocks.

Investment Analysis

JQUA

Pros

The ETF charges a 0.12% expense ratio, which is relatively low compared to active funds.
It has accumulated $9.3 billion in net assets, indicating significant investor adoption.
It offers a 1.05% dividend yield, providing a modest income stream to investors.

Considerations

The fund has been available since 2017, meaning it has a shorter track record than older funds.
The specific index tracked is not available, which reduces transparency on its quality methodology.
Sector weights are not available, making it difficult to assess the underlying economic exposure.

SPMO

Pros

It has a larger net asset base of $28.9 billion, suggesting high liquidity and market presence.
The fund tracks momentum strategies, which have been available to investors since 2015.
It maintains a low expense ratio of 0.13%, keeping ongoing costs manageable for investors.

Considerations

Its dividend yield of 0.72% is lower than many income-focused or balanced equity funds.
Individual holdings like Micron at 11.09% represent a higher concentration risk than broad indices.
The underlying index is not available, which limits the ability to verify the momentum methodology.

About JQUA and SPMO

JQUA (JQUA)

The JP Morgan US Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) is an exchange-traded fund designed to help investors gain exposure to high-quality US equities. With a Large Blend category, it targets companies exhibiting strong balance sheets, consistent earnings, and favourable cash flow characteristics. Since its inception in November 2017, the fund has grown significantly, managing net assets of USD 9.28 billion across 312 holdings. It offers a relatively low expense ratio of 0.12%, making it an accessible option for those seeking factor-based strategies without heavy costs. Investors receive a dividend yield of 1.05%, reflecting the fund's focus on mature, financially sound companies. As with any investment, values can rise and fall, and returns are not guaranteed, so understanding the underlying quality factors is essential for suitability.

SPMO (SPMO)

The Invesco S&P 500 Momentum ETF offers investors exposure to companies within the S&P 500 index that have demonstrated stronger price performance compared to the broader market in recent times. By focusing on stocks with positive momentum trends, the fund aims to capture opportunities in sectors or companies currently experiencing growth or renewed interest. It holds approximately 102 companies, reflecting a diversified approach within the large-cap category. With a low expense ratio of 0.13%, it provides a cost-effective way to gain this specific type of market exposure. Investors should note that while momentum strategies can perform well during trending markets, they may underperform during market reversals or periods of volatility. Values can rise and fall, and past performance is not a guarantee of future results. This ETF is suitable for those interested in understanding systematic investment approaches, keeping risk tolerance in mind.

Buy JQUA or SPMO in Nemo

🆓

Zero Commission

Trade stocks, ETFs, and more with zero commission. Keep more of your returns.

🔒

Trusted & Regulated

Part of Exinity Group 2015, serving over a million customers globally.

💰

6% Interest on Cash

Earn 6% AER on uninvested cash with daily interest payments.

JQUA vs SPMO

Fund Snapshot