What is the main structural difference between JQUA and SPYM?

SPYM is a broad market tracker explicitly designed to mirror the S&P 500 index, which is a capitalisation-weighted measure of large-cap US equities. JQUA, however, is a factor-based ETF, as indicated by its name 'JP Morgan US Quality Factor ETF', meaning it seeks to tilt exposure towards companies with high quality metrics, such as strong balance sheets and consistent earnings. While the provided data notes that JQUA's specific index tracking methodology is 'not available', its classification as a Large Blend fund suggests it covers a similar universe of companies but with a different weighting logic compared to the pure market-cap approach of SPYM. This structural difference drives variations in holdings and potential performance characteristics.

How should investors interpret the expense ratio difference?

The expense ratio represents the annual cost of holding the fund, deducted directly from the fund's assets. SPYM has an exceptionally low expense ratio of 0.02%, whereas JQUA charges 0.12%. This means JQUA is 0.10 percentage points more expensive per year. Over time, this cost difference compounds, meaning a significant portion of JQUA's gross return is consumed by fees compared to SPYM. For investors holding these funds for long periods, even small differences in expense ratios can impact net returns. The lower fee of SPYM makes it more cost-efficient for pure market exposure, while JQUA's higher fee might be justified by its specific factor strategy, though the data provided does not quantify this trade-off.

What does the lack of sector weight data imply for these funds?

For both JQUA and SPYM, the sector weight data is listed as 'not available'. This limits an investor's ability to assess diversification levels and potential sector concentration risks directly from the provided factsheet. Typically, sector weights help determine if a fund is overexposed to specific industries like technology or healthcare. Without this data, one must rely on the top holdings for a partial view. Since both funds share major tech companies in their top holdings, it is possible they have similar technology exposure, but the exact breakdown across other sectors remains unknown. Investors should seek additional documentation from the issuers if sector allocation is a critical component of their portfolio construction.

How do the top holdings of JQUA and SPYM compare?

There is a noticeable overlap in the top ten holdings, with seven common stocks: AAPL, MU, AVGO, MSFT, NVDA, META, and GOOGL. This high degree of overlap is expected as both funds focus on large-cap US equities. However, the concentration differs significantly. SPYM holds much larger weights in its top companies; for example, NVDA comprises 8.15% of SPYM compared to just 1.94% in JQUA. Similarly, AAPL is 7.43% in SPYM versus 2.11% in JQUA. JQUA appears to have a more diversified top holdings profile, possibly due to its quality factor screen or different weighting methodology, which reduces single-stock risk compared to the capitalisation-weighted approach of SPYM.

Which fund is more suitable for long-term core portfolio holdings?

SPYM, with its 0.02% expense ratio and massive $157.4 billion asset base, is structured as a cost-efficient core holding for broad US market exposure. Its long history since 2005 and tracking of the S&P 500 provide transparency and stability. JQUA, with a 0.12% expense ratio and a focus on quality factors, is typically viewed as a satellite or strategic overlay to modify risk-return profiles rather than a standalone core holding. While JQUA's $9.3 billion assets and 2017 inception show solid adoption, the higher cost and less transparent index methodology (listed as 'not available') suggest it serves a specific factor tilt purpose rather than general market capture. The choice depends on whether the investor seeks plain market returns or a quality-adjusted equity exposure.

How do the dividend yields of JQUA and SPYM differ?

JQUA currently offers a dividend yield of 1.05%, which is slightly higher than SPYM's 1.00%. This 0.05 percentage point difference is minimal in the context of total return potential. Both yields are modest, reflecting the nature of large-cap growth and quality stocks that typically retain earnings for reinvestment rather than distributing them as dividends. Neither fund is positioned as a high-yield income vehicle. Investors seeking income from equities generally need to look beyond these broad or quality-factor funds or supplement them with dividend-specific ETFs. The yields provided are snapshots and can fluctuate based on stock price changes and corporate dividend policies, so they should not be relied upon as fixed income streams.

What are the liquidity and scale differences between these two ETFs?

SPYM is a dominant player in the US ETF market with net assets of $157.4 billion, providing significant liquidity and institutional-grade scale. JQUA is substantially smaller in comparison, holding $9.3 billion in assets. While $9.3 billion is still a large asset base that supports healthy trading volumes for most individual investors, the gap in scale highlights SPYM's ubiquity. The size of SPYM often translates into tighter bid-ask spreads and higher trading volume, which can reduce transaction costs. JQUA's smaller size might result in slightly wider spreads, although its factor strategy is niche compared to the broad market mandate of SPYM. The inception dates also show SPYM is more established, having launched in 2005 versus JQUA in 2017.

Does the 'Quality Factor' strategy of JQUA outperform the S&P 500?

The provided data does not contain historical performance figures, tracking errors, or returns, so it is impossible to determine if JQUA's quality factor strategy has outperformed the S&P 500 tracked by SPYM. Factor investing generally aims to provide risk-adjusted returns or lower volatility compared to cap-weighted indices, but this is not guaranteed. JQUA's specific index tracking is listed as 'not available', which obscures the precise rules it follows to define 'quality'. SPYM tracks a well-known benchmark. Without performance data, an investor cannot verify the success of the factor premium in JQUA relative to the market beta in SPYM. One must consult the fund providers' historical fact sheets for performance comparisons.

How do the top holdings weights impact portfolio diversification?

SPYM is heavily weighted towards a few mega-cap tech stocks, with its top holding NVDA at 8.15% and AAPL at 7.43%. This means nearly 16% of the fund rests on just two companies. JQUA has a much flatter distribution among its top holdings, with NVDA at 1.94% and AAPL at 2.11%. This suggests JQUA provides broader diversification within the large-cap universe and reduces single-stock concentration risk compared to the cap-weighted approach of SPYM. However, because sector weight data is unavailable for both, it is unclear if JQUA achieves this diversification across industries or remains concentrated in tech through different names. Investors concerned about specific stock risk might find JQUA's weighting more attractive, despite its higher fee.

What should I know about the inception dates of these funds?

SPYM has been operating since November 8, 2005, giving it over 20 years of track record data for investors to analyse. JQUA was launched more recently on November 8, 2017. The longer history of SPYM provides more confidence in its replication ability and operational resilience through multiple market cycles. JQUA's shorter history of around 9 years (relative to the 2026 data fetch date) means less data is available to judge its factor model's performance across varying economic conditions, such as different phases of a quality factor rotation. Both funds are established enough to be considered operational, but the depth of historical performance analysis differs significantly due to these inception dates.

JQUA vs SPYM

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

This page compares JP Morgan US Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF (SPYM) on fees, holdings, dividends and market tracking. JQUA charges 0.12% with $9.3bn assets; SPYM charges 0.02% with $157.4bn. Both show 1.00–1.05% yields. JQUA index focus is not available; SPYM tracks the S&P 500. Educational content, not financial advice.

Fund Snapshot

Discover More Comparisons

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.

JQUA vs SPMO

Compare JQUA and SPMO on fees, holdings, and dividends. JQUA: 0.12% fee. SPMO: 0.13% fee. Track records and yields differ. Research both funds.

Investment Analysis

JQUA

Pros

JQUA offers a moderate cost of 0.12% expense ratio.
JQUA provides a relatively large asset base of $9.3 billion.
JQUA maintains a long operational history since November 2017.

Considerations

The fund reports a modest dividend yield of 1.05%.
It lacks specified index tracking data, limiting methodological clarity.
Sector weight data is unavailable, hindering diversification assessment.

SPYM

Pros

SPYM features an exceptionally low expense ratio of 0.02%.
It holds a massive asset base of $157.4 billion.
The fund has a well-established track record since November 2005.

Considerations

The dividend yield is slightly lower at 1.00%.
Sector weight information is not available for transparency.
There is no reported index tracking methodology for evaluation.

About JQUA and SPYM

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.

SPYM (SPYM)

This ETF aims to track a large-cap US equity benchmark, typically offering diversified exposure to hundreds of major companies. With a low expense ratio of 0.02%, it is designed for cost-efficient long-term portfolio building. It holds a significant amount of net assets, currently reported at approximately USD 157.41 billion, which can indicate liquidity and widespread institutional use. The fund provides exposure across various sectors of the US economy through its holdings, currently numbering around 508 companies. Investors might consider this as a core holding or a satellite position to complement other assets. As with all equity investments, the value of the ETF can fluctuate, and there is no guarantee of profit. It serves as a vehicle for gaining broad market exposure rather than trying to outperform specific stocks.

Buy JQUA or SPYM 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.

Holding	JQUA	SPYM
AAPLApple Inc.	2.11%	7.43%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.	2.01%	1.74%
AVGOBroadcom Inc.	2.01%	2.57%
MSFTMicrosoft Corporation	1.99%	5.55%
NVDANVIDIA Corporation	1.94%	8.15%
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.	1.94%	2.22%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc.	1.87%	3.11%

JQUA vs SPYM

Fund Snapshot