LVDS vs QDEF
JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF vs Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive ETF
Which is better, LVDS or QDEF?
LVDS has been ahead.
LVDS has a lower expense ratio. LVDS led over 1Y and the full window. LVDS is less concentrated, with 30.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.5%.
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 | LVDS | QDEF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30%Best | 0.37% |
| AUM | $114M | $555M |
| Dividend Yield | 7.56% | 1.60% |
| Holdings | 133 | 137 |
| YTD Return | +20.52%Best | +12.91% |
| 1Y Return | +25.95%Best | +16.44% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +20.19% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.98% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.6% | 9.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -6.6%Best | -7.0% |
| $10,000 over 1.3 years | $13,088Best | $12,472 |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.3%Best | 36.5% |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Northern Trust Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 11, 2025 | Dec 14, 2012 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 14, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.3 years).
LVDS vs QDEF 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 1.3 years both funds cover.
LVDS vs QDEF Performance
JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and Northern Trust Quality Dividend Defensive ETF (QDEF) is an ETF from Northern Trust Asset Management. Over the past year LVDS returned +25.95% while QDEF returned +16.44%. Year to date, LVDS is up 20.52% versus a gain of 12.91% for QDEF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LVDS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 10.6% compared with 9.0% for QDEF. 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 -6.6% for LVDS and -7.0% for QDEF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LVDS charges 0.30% per year while QDEF charges 0.37%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $37 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LVDS currently yields 7.56% against 1.60% for QDEF.
Holdings Overlap
36.9% of LVDS's money is in holdings QDEF also owns. 36.2% of QDEF's money is in holdings LVDS also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
33 positions in common, counted across the 131 positions we hold weights for in LVDS and 154 in QDEF, against full books of 133 and 137.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 117 positions for QDEF that do not appear in our book for LVDS (61.9% of the fund), and 96 for LVDS that do not appear in QDEF (62.1%).
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 LVDS | Weight in QDEF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.39% | 8.95% | 3.56% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.92% | 4.55% | 1.37% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.45% | 2.80% | 1.35% |
| PMPhilip Morris International Inc. | 1.66% | 2.06% | 0.40% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.93% | 1.14% | 0.79% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 2.46% | 0.49% | 1.97% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.29% | 1.59% | 0.30% |
| WFCWells Fargo & Co. | 1.52% | 0.83% | 0.69% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.49% | 1.72% | 1.23% |
| MSMorgan Stanley | 1.27% | 0.72% | 0.55% |
36.9% of LVDS is already inside QDEF.
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, LVDS or QDEF?
LVDS has an expense ratio of 0.30% while QDEF charges 0.37%. LVDS is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LVDS or QDEF?
Over the past year LVDS returned +25.95% vs +16.44% for QDEF, so LVDS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), LVDS annualized +23.00% vs +18.52% for QDEF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LVDS or QDEF?
LVDS has been the more volatile fund at 10.6% annualized versus 9.0% for QDEF. Worst drawdown: LVDS -6.6% vs QDEF -7.0%.
Should I hold both LVDS and QDEF?
LVDS and QDEF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between LVDS and QDEF?
36.9% of LVDS's money is in holdings QDEF also owns. 36.2% of QDEF's is in holdings LVDS also owns. They hold 33 positions in common, counted across the 131 positions we hold weights for in LVDS and 154 in QDEF.
Which pays a higher dividend, LVDS or QDEF?
LVDS yields 7.56% while QDEF yields 1.60%, so LVDS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QDEF better than LVDS?
LVDS has a lower expense ratio. LVDS led over 1Y and the full window. LVDS is less concentrated, with 30.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.