Investors seeking income and growth from Nasdaq-100 exposure have two popular ETF choices: GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and JEPQ (JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF). Both tap into premium-income strategies, but after digging into the data, GPIQ emerges as the better performer on several fronts. Here’s why.
What Are These Funds & How They Differ
| ETF | Strategy & Key Attributes |
|---|---|
| GPIQ | Managed by Goldman Sachs; uses a covered-call (option overlay) strategy (writing calls on portions of its Nasdaq-100 exposure), dynamic in how much is “overlaid,” aiming for income + participation in upside. StockAnalysis+3AInvest+3PortfoliosLab+3 |
| JEPQ | Managed by JPMorgan; uses equity-linked notes (ELNs) and derivative structures, plus underlying Nasdaq-100 equity exposure. High yield tends to come with trade-offs in flexibility and cost. Tickeron+3AInvest+3StockAnalysis+3 |
Criteria: How GPIQ Outperforms
Below are the main axes of comparison, and how GPIQ leads in most.
| Criterion | GPIQ’s Performance / Features | JEPQ’s Performance / Weaknesses | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Return (YTD / 1-Year etc.) | Year-to-date, GPIQ delivers ~13.6% return vs JEPQ’s ~ 8.2%. One-year return for GPIQ around 22.9%, vs JEPQ’s ~ 18.1%. PortfoliosLab+2PortfoliosLab+2 | Lower growth over same periods. | For investors who want both income and growth, a higher total return means more compounding and less drag from costs/yield caps. |
| Risk-Adjusted Metrics | Sharpe Ratio (≈ 1.10 vs 0.97), Sortino (≈ 1.87 vs 1.64), Calmar (≈ 1.25 vs 1.04), Martin Ratio (~ 4.84 vs ~ 3.68) favour GPIQ. PortfoliosLab+2PortfoliosLab+2 | JEPQ trails on many such metrics. | High yield doesn’t help if risk (especially downside or volatility) eats up returns. These metrics show GPIQ offers more efficient risk/return trade-offs. |
| Expense Ratio / Cost Structure | GPIQ: ~0.29% expense ratio. PortfoliosLab+2Tickeron+2 | JEPQ: ~0.35%. PortfoliosLab+2StockAnalysis+2 | Over time, lower fees help returns compound; difference may seem small but meaningful over years. |
| Dividend Yield & Income Sustainability | GPIQ offers a strong yield (~ 9.8-10%) plus dividends driven by option premiums; more predictable income via its overlay strategy. PortfoliosLab+1 | JEPQ sometimes has higher headline yield (~ 10.75%) but riskier sustainability: more derivative exposure, possible NAV erosion, less flexibility to adapt. PortfoliosLab+2AInvest+2 | Income matters especially for yield-seekers or retirees. But you want sustainable income that isn’t masking losses in principal or giving up too much upside. |
| Drawdowns & Volatility | GPIQ has a slightly higher volatility (i.e. more price fluctuations), but its maximum drawdowns have been similar to JEPQ’s and risk-adjusted measures mitigate the higher volatility somewhat. PortfoliosLab+1 | JEPQ shows somewhat lower volatility, but the downside risk especially in certain environments (strong bull runs) means potentially more forgone gains. | Investors need to weigh both downside risk and opportunity cost of missing upside. GPIQ seems to balance better. |
| Upside Capture vs Flexibility | By using a dynamic call overlay (i.e. not always fully covered, adjusting overlay %), GPIQ retains more participation in upside in rising markets. AInvest+1 | JEPQ’s structures (ELNs etc.) may limit upside more rigidly. During strong rallies, that cost of “cap” becomes significant. | This matters when markets are bullish. A yield-heavy strategy that severely limits upside can lag significantly when gains are available. |
Caveats & When JEPQ Might Be Preferred
It’s not that GPIQ is always superior in every scenario. For some investors, JEPQ still has appeal:
-
If you prioritize maximum yield today, regardless of some risk to NAV, JEPQ’s slightly higher yield may be tempting.
-
For someone with lower volatility tolerance who wants smoother returns and maybe less sensitivity to strategy changes or active overlay decisions, JEPQ could feel more predictable.
-
Over very short horizons in sharply bullish markets, JEPQ might capture a bit more, depending on how the derivatives/ELNs are structured.
Conclusion
When you stack up total return, risk-adjusted return, expense ratio, and sustainability of income, GPIQ comes out ahead of JEPQ on multiple fronts. The modest sacrifice in headline yield is more than offset by stronger performance over time, better efficiency, and greater flexibility.
For investors seeking a balanced income + growth play in Nasdaq-100 exposure, GPIQ seems to offer the better value right now.