JQUA vs JUST
JPMorgan US Quality Factor ETF vs Goldman Sachs JUST US Large Cap Equity ETF
Which is better, JQUA or JUST?
Nearly the same fund. JQUA costs less.
JQUA has a lower expense ratio. JQUA led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, JUST over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. JQUA is less concentrated, with 19.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.9%.
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 | JQUA | JUST |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.12%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $9.3B | $572M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.08% | 0.94% |
| Holdings | 624 | 461 |
| YTD Return | +19.98%Best | +14.35% |
| 1Y Return | +21.86%Best | +18.75% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.91% | +22.22%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.77%Best | +12.57% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 16.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -32.9%Best | -33.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,061Best | $18,076 |
| Top 10 Weight | 19.8%Best | 41.9% |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Goldman Sachs Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 8, 2017 | Jun 7, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 18, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.3 years).
JQUA vs JUST 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 8.3 years both funds cover.
JQUA vs JUST Performance
JPMorgan US Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and Goldman Sachs JUST US Large Cap Equity ETF (JUST) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Over the past year JQUA returned +21.86% while JUST returned +18.75%. Year to date, JQUA is up 19.98% versus a gain of 14.35% for JUST.
Over three years, JQUA compounded at +20.91% per year against +22.22% for JUST; over five years the annualized figures are +13.77% and +12.57% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, JQUA has the edge at +14.14% annualized vs +13.71%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JUST has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 15.6% for JQUA. 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 -32.9% for JQUA and -33.8% for JUST. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JQUA charges 0.12% per year while JUST charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $12 vs $20 annually, a gap of $8 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JQUA currently yields 1.08% against 0.94% for JUST.
Holdings Overlap
65.0% of JQUA's money is in holdings JUST also owns. 58.7% of JUST's money is in holdings JQUA also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
150 positions in common, counted across the 306 positions we hold weights for in JQUA and 462 in JUST, against full books of 624 and 461.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 298 positions for JUST that do not appear in our book for JQUA (40.7% of the fund), and 143 for JQUA that do not appear in JUST (32.7%).
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 JQUA | Weight in JUST | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 2.00% | 8.84% | 6.84% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.06% | 7.84% | 5.78% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 2.05% | 6.25% | 4.20% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 1.80% | 3.24% | 1.44% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.92% | 2.62% | 0.70% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.16% | 2.03% | 0.13% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 2.26% | 1.64% | 0.62% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 1.78% | 1.43% | 0.35% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.69% | 1.14% | 0.55% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.54% | 1.02% | 0.52% |
65.0% of JQUA is already inside JUST.
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, JQUA or JUST?
JQUA has an expense ratio of 0.12% while JUST charges 0.20%. JQUA is the cheaper option, by $8 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JQUA or JUST?
Over the past year JQUA returned +21.86% vs +18.75% for JUST, so JQUA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), JQUA annualized +14.14% vs +13.71% for JUST. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JQUA or JUST?
JUST has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 15.6% for JQUA. Worst drawdown: JQUA -32.9% vs JUST -33.8%.
Should I hold both JQUA and JUST?
JQUA and JUST have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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 JQUA and JUST?
65.0% of JQUA's money is in holdings JUST also owns. 58.7% of JUST's is in holdings JQUA also owns. They hold 150 positions in common, counted across the 306 positions we hold weights for in JQUA and 462 in JUST.
Which pays a higher dividend, JQUA or JUST?
JQUA yields 1.08% while JUST yields 0.94%, so JQUA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is JUST better than JQUA?
JQUA has a lower expense ratio. JQUA led over 1Y, 5Y and the full window, JUST over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. JQUA is less concentrated, with 19.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.