JMOM vs RECS
JPMorgan US Momentum Factor ETF vs Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF
Which is better, JMOM or RECS?
Each has led over a different period.
JMOM has a lower expense ratio. JMOM led over 1Y and 3Y, RECS over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. JMOM is less concentrated, with 19.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.0%.
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 | JMOM | RECS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.12%Best | 0.15% |
| AUM | $2.8B | $6.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.75% | 1.01% |
| Holdings | 594 | 718 |
| YTD Return | +20.05%Best | +11.16% |
| 1Y Return | +22.67%Best | +15.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.39%Best | +22.44% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.72% | +13.81%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.4% | 16.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -34.3%Tie | -34.3%Tie |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,019 | $19,094Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 19.1%Best | 42.0% |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Columbia Threadneedle Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 8, 2017 | Sep 25, 2019 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 9, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.9 years).
JMOM vs RECS 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 8.9 years both funds cover.
JMOM vs RECS Performance
JPMorgan US Momentum Factor ETF (JMOM) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF (RECS) is an ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year JMOM returned +22.67% while RECS returned +15.54%. Year to date, JMOM is up 20.05% versus a gain of 11.16% for RECS.
Over three years, JMOM compounded at +26.39% per year against +22.44% for RECS; over five years the annualized figures are +13.72% and +13.81% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, RECS has the edge at +16.53% annualized vs +15.02%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JMOM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.4% compared with 16.1% for RECS. 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 -34.3% for JMOM and -34.3% for RECS. 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
JMOM charges 0.12% per year while RECS charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $12 vs $15 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JMOM currently yields 0.75% against 1.01% for RECS.
Holdings Overlap
37.8% of JMOM's money is in holdings RECS also owns. 50.6% of RECS's money is in holdings JMOM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
104 positions in common, counted across the 285 positions we hold weights for in JMOM and 353 in RECS, against full books of 594 and 718.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 236 positions for RECS that do not appear in our book for JMOM (48.0% of the fund), and 171 for JMOM that do not appear in RECS (59.0%).
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 JMOM | Weight in RECS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.03% | 11.96% | 9.93% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 1.97% | 12.01% | 10.04% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.12% | 2.28% | 0.16% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 1.27% | 0.93% | 0.34% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 1.28% | 0.73% | 0.55% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.27% | 0.68% | 0.59% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.71% | 1.15% | 0.44% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.08% | 0.63% | 0.45% |
| TJXTjx Cos., Inc. | 0.46% | 1.24% | 0.78% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 0.43% | 1.22% | 0.79% |
50.6% of RECS is already inside JMOM.
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, JMOM or RECS?
JMOM has an expense ratio of 0.12% while RECS charges 0.15%. JMOM is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JMOM or RECS?
Over the past year JMOM returned +22.67% vs +15.54% for RECS, so JMOM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), JMOM annualized +15.02% vs +16.53% for RECS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JMOM or RECS?
JMOM has been the more volatile fund at 17.4% annualized versus 16.1% for RECS. Worst drawdown: JMOM -34.3% vs RECS -34.3%.
Should I hold both JMOM and RECS?
JMOM and RECS 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 JMOM and RECS?
50.6% of RECS's money is in holdings JMOM also owns. 50.6% of RECS's is in holdings JMOM also owns. They hold 104 positions in common, counted across the 285 positions we hold weights for in JMOM and 353 in RECS.
Which pays a higher dividend, JMOM or RECS?
JMOM yields 0.75% while RECS yields 1.01%, so RECS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RECS better than JMOM?
JMOM has a lower expense ratio. JMOM led over 1Y and 3Y, RECS over 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. JMOM is less concentrated, with 19.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.