JAVA vs PJFV
JPMorgan Active Value ETF vs PGIM Jennison Focused Value ETF
Which is better, JAVA or PJFV?
PJFV has been ahead.
PJFV has a lower expense ratio. PJFV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. JAVA is less concentrated, with 29.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.1%.
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 | JAVA | PJFV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.44% | 0.33%Best |
| AUM | $7.4B | $183M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.19% | 0.57% |
| Holdings | 153 | 37 |
| YTD Return | +13.15% | +20.68%Best |
| 1Y Return | +20.54% | +27.75%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.31% | +24.90%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.63% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.3% | 11.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -16.5%Best | -18.1% |
| $10,000 over 3.8 years | $16,431 | $20,686Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 29.8%Best | 41.1% |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | PGIM Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Oct 4, 2021 | Dec 12, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 14, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.8 years).
JAVA vs PJFV 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 3.8 years both funds cover.
JAVA vs PJFV Performance
JPMorgan Active Value ETF (JAVA) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and PGIM Jennison Focused Value ETF (PJFV) is an ETF from PGIM Investments. Over the past year JAVA returned +20.54% while PJFV returned +27.75%. Year to date, JAVA is up 13.15% versus a gain of 20.68% for PJFV.
Over three years, JAVA compounded at +18.31% per year against +24.90% for PJFV. Across the full 4-year window we track, PJFV has the edge at +21.08% annualized vs +13.96%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JAVA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.3% compared with 11.7% for PJFV. 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 -16.5% for JAVA and -18.1% for PJFV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JAVA charges 0.44% per year while PJFV charges 0.33%. On a $10,000 position that is $44 vs $33 annually, a gap of $11 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JAVA currently yields 1.19% against 0.57% for PJFV.
Holdings Overlap
28.9% of JAVA's money is in holdings PJFV also owns. 52.0% of PJFV's money is in holdings JAVA also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
16 positions in common, counted across the 151 positions we hold weights for in JAVA and 35 in PJFV, against full books of 153 and 37.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 15 positions for PJFV that do not appear in our book for JAVA (37.0% of the fund), and 134 for JAVA that do not appear in PJFV (70.8%).
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 JAVA | Weight in PJFV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.29% | 6.30% | 0.01% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 7.63% | 4.67% | 2.96% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 3.41% | 5.66% | 2.25% |
| WFCWells Fargo & Co. | 2.13% | 2.69% | 0.56% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.77% | 2.93% | 1.16% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 0.65% | 4.01% | 3.36% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 2.19% | 2.21% | 0.02% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.60% | 2.38% | 0.78% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 0.44% | 3.41% | 2.97% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 0.37% | 3.03% | 2.66% |
52.0% of PJFV is already inside JAVA.
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, JAVA or PJFV?
JAVA has an expense ratio of 0.44% while PJFV charges 0.33%. PJFV is the cheaper option, by $11 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JAVA or PJFV?
Over the past year JAVA returned +20.54% vs +27.75% for PJFV, so PJFV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), JAVA annualized +13.96% vs +21.08% for PJFV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JAVA or PJFV?
JAVA has been the more volatile fund at 12.3% annualized versus 11.7% for PJFV. Worst drawdown: JAVA -16.5% vs PJFV -18.1%.
Should I hold both JAVA and PJFV?
JAVA and PJFV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 JAVA and PJFV?
52.0% of PJFV's money is in holdings JAVA also owns. 52.0% of PJFV's is in holdings JAVA also owns. They hold 16 positions in common, counted across the 151 positions we hold weights for in JAVA and 35 in PJFV.
Which pays a higher dividend, JAVA or PJFV?
JAVA yields 1.19% while PJFV yields 0.57%, so JAVA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PJFV better than JAVA?
PJFV has a lower expense ratio. PJFV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. JAVA is less concentrated, with 29.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.