JQUA vs RECS
JPMorgan US Quality Factor ETF vs Columbia Research Enhanced Core ETF
Which is better, JQUA or RECS?
Each has led over a different period.
JQUA has a lower expense ratio. JQUA led over 1Y, RECS over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. JQUA is less concentrated, with 19.8% 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 | JQUA | RECS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.12%Best | 0.15% |
| AUM | $9.3B | $6.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.08% | 1.01% |
| Holdings | 624 | 718 |
| YTD Return | +19.98%Best | +11.16% |
| 1Y Return | +21.86%Best | +15.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.91% | +22.44%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.77% | +13.81%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 16.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -32.9%Best | -34.3% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,061 | $19,094Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 19.8%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).
JQUA 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.
JQUA vs RECS Performance
JPMorgan US Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) 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 JQUA returned +21.86% while RECS returned +15.54%. Year to date, JQUA is up 19.98% versus a gain of 11.16% for RECS.
Over three years, JQUA compounded at +20.91% per year against +22.44% for RECS; over five years the annualized figures are +13.77% and +13.81% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, RECS has the edge at +16.53% annualized vs +14.13%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RECS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.1% compared with 15.3% 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 -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 0.94. 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 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, JQUA currently yields 1.08% against 1.01% for RECS.
Holdings Overlap
44.5% of JQUA's money is in holdings RECS also owns. 62.0% of RECS's money is in holdings JQUA also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
126 positions in common, counted across the 306 positions we hold weights for in JQUA and 353 in RECS, against full books of 624 and 718.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 212 positions for RECS that do not appear in our book for JQUA (36.5% of the fund), and 170 for JQUA that do not appear in RECS (54.1%).
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 RECS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.06% | 11.96% | 9.90% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 2.00% | 12.01% | 10.01% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.10% | 4.79% | 2.69% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.16% | 2.28% | 0.12% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.31% | 2.36% | 1.05% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.24% | 1.05% | 0.19% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 0.69% | 1.60% | 0.91% |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 1.29% | 0.93% | 0.36% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.25% | 0.63% | 0.62% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 1.15% | 0.73% | 0.42% |
62.0% of RECS is already inside JQUA.
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 RECS?
JQUA has an expense ratio of 0.12% while RECS charges 0.15%. JQUA is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JQUA or RECS?
Over the past year JQUA returned +21.86% vs +15.54% for RECS, so JQUA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), JQUA annualized +14.13% vs +16.53% for RECS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JQUA or RECS?
RECS has been the more volatile fund at 16.1% annualized versus 15.3% for JQUA. Worst drawdown: JQUA -32.9% vs RECS -34.3%.
Should I hold both JQUA and RECS?
JQUA and RECS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 RECS?
62.0% of RECS's money is in holdings JQUA also owns. 62.0% of RECS's is in holdings JQUA also owns. They hold 126 positions in common, counted across the 306 positions we hold weights for in JQUA and 353 in RECS.
Which pays a higher dividend, JQUA or RECS?
JQUA yields 1.08% while RECS yields 1.01%, so JQUA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RECS better than JQUA?
JQUA has a lower expense ratio. JQUA led over 1Y, RECS over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. JQUA is less concentrated, with 19.8% 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.