GPIX vs LCDS
Goldman Sachs S&P 500 Premium Income ETF vs JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Core ETF
Which is better, GPIX or LCDS?
Nearly the same fund. GPIX costs less.
GPIX has a lower expense ratio. LCDS led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. GPIX is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GPIX | LCDS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.29%Best | 0.30% |
| AUM | $6.3B | $17M |
| Dividend Yield | 8.16% | 0.86% |
| Holdings | 496 | 230 |
| YTD Return | +13.52%Best | +13.43% |
| 1Y Return | +17.92% | +18.13%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.39% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.5%Best | 11.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -17.5%Best | -18.4% |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $14,779 | $14,806Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9%Best | 44.3% |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | J.P. Morgan Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 24, 2023 | Aug 7, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 8, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.2 years).
GPIX vs LCDS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.2 years both funds cover.
GPIX vs LCDS Performance
Goldman Sachs S&P 500 Premium Income ETF (GPIX) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Core ETF (LCDS) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Over the past year GPIX returned +17.92% while LCDS returned +18.13%. Year to date, GPIX is up 13.52% versus a gain of 13.43% for LCDS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCDS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.9% compared with 10.5% for GPIX. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -17.5% for GPIX and -18.4% for LCDS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GPIX charges 0.29% per year while LCDS charges 0.30%. On a $10,000 position that is $29 vs $30 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GPIX currently yields 8.16% against 0.86% for LCDS.
Holdings Overlap
59.3% of GPIX's money is in holdings LCDS also owns. 95.2% of LCDS's money is in holdings GPIX also owns.
Most of LCDS is already inside GPIX. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
101 positions in common, counted across the 491 positions we hold weights for in GPIX and 113 in LCDS, against full books of 496 and 230.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 9 positions for LCDS that do not appear in our book for GPIX (4.1% of the fund), and 368 for GPIX that do not appear in LCDS (40.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GPIX | Weight in LCDS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 8.14% | 9.22% | 1.08% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.41% | 7.46% | 0.05% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp_None_0 | 5.50% | 6.60% | 1.10% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc-cl A | 3.25% | 4.95% | 1.70% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.83% | 4.19% | 0.36% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.51% | 2.34% | 0.17% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 1.47% | 3.02% | 1.55% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.69% | 2.67% | 0.98% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 1.28% | 1.71% | 0.43% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp | 1.08% | 1.88% | 0.80% |
95.2% of LCDS is already inside GPIX.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GPIX or LCDS?
GPIX has an expense ratio of 0.29% while LCDS charges 0.30%. GPIX is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GPIX or LCDS?
Over the past year GPIX returned +17.92% vs +18.13% for LCDS, so LCDS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GPIX annualized +19.43% vs +19.53% for LCDS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GPIX or LCDS?
LCDS has been the more volatile fund at 11.9% annualized versus 10.5% for GPIX. Worst drawdown: GPIX -17.5% vs LCDS -18.4%.
Should I hold both GPIX and LCDS?
GPIX and LCDS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GPIX and LCDS?
95.2% of LCDS's money is in holdings GPIX also owns. 95.2% of LCDS's is in holdings GPIX also owns. They hold 101 positions in common, counted across the 491 positions we hold weights for in GPIX and 113 in LCDS.
Which pays a higher dividend, GPIX or LCDS?
GPIX yields 8.16% while LCDS yields 0.86%, so GPIX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCDS better than GPIX?
GPIX has a lower expense ratio. LCDS led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. GPIX is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.