JEPI’s Crown Slips: Why QDPL Just Became the New King of Income and Growth

Income ETFs—What’s the Point?

Investing in today’s low-yield environment means many income-seeking investors are scouring for ETFs that generate real cash flow, while still offering upside—or at least not sacrificing too much. Broadly speaking, you’ll find two major families:

Covered call / option overlay funds – Funds that take a core equity portfolio (often large-cap U.S. stocks) and write call options on them to generate extra premium income, thereby boosting yield but often sacrificing some upside. JEPI is a prime example.
Dividend multiplier or enhanced-dividend strategies – Funds that attempt to magnify dividend yield (and sometimes growth) by using futures or other derivatives tied to dividends, while retaining much of the equity upside rather than capping it via call writes. QDPL is an example of this approach.

The debate for the income investor then becomes: Which model is superior for your goals? Do you prefer higher yield today with some sacrifice of upside (covered calls)? Or do you prefer a strategy that keeps more upside and also attempts to enhance dividend yield (multiplier style)? I believe that QDPL belongs to the latter camp—and that given the broader macro picture (inflation, equity valuations, interest rate uncertainty) QDPL is now the better choice. JEPI, while popular and well-run, faces structural headwinds in a rising equity market (and in fact arguably already shows its limitations).
Below I walk through both funds, compare them head-to-head in terms of structure, performance, risk, yield and suitability, then make the case for QDPL.

Deep-Dive into JEPI

Structure & Strategy

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPI) is an actively-managed large-cap blend ETF launched on May 20, 2020. ETF Database+1
The fund invests primarily in (at least 80%) U.S. large-cap equities (many drawn from the S&P 500), selecting stocks that exhibit low-volatility and value characteristics. ETF Database+1
On top of that, the manager overlays a covered-call (option-writing) strategy: after owning the stocks, JEPI writes call options on those stocks (or on indices) to generate premium income. This premium serves to boost current income. ETF Database+1

So: you’re getting two levers — stock dividends plus option premium. In theory this gives you higher yield than a plain S&P 500 equity fund, with lower downside (because the call-premium cushions some losses) and with less upside (because you cap what the equity portfolio can earn, by virtue of the written calls).

Key Statistics

Expense ratio: ~ 0.35% for JEPI. ETF Database+1
Since inception the fund’s annualized return has been around 11.6% (per some sources) though there are caveats given its relatively short track record. StockAnalysis+1
Yield: According to the StockAnalysis page, JEPI currently offers ~8.3% yield. StockAnalysis
Drawdown: The worst drawdown since inception is around -13.71%. Total Real Returns+1
Holdings concentration: JEPI has ~112 holdings, with ~72.3% of assets in the top 50 holdings. ETF Database

Strengths

For income investors who worry about market volatility or drawdowns, JEPI offers a compelling buffer: the option premium provides immediate cash flow; the covered-call portion dampens participation when the market rallies hard (but also helps cushion when the market falls).
It is well-known, widely held, highly liquid — which matters in the ETF space where niche strategies sometimes suffer from poor liquidity or large bid/ask spreads.
The team at JPMorgan is reputable; the fund is actively managed and thus has flexibility to adjust.

Weaknesses

The very nature of covered calls means you give up significant part of the upside in a strong bull market. If the underlying equity portfolio rallies strongly, the written calls will limit participation.
When asset valuations are high, the option premium earned may not be enough to offset broader market risk (especially if the market falls). In other words: in a flat or down market it may perform okay (because the premium helps) but in a strong up market it will underperform a plain equity fund.
Income is front-loaded (via premium) but the ongoing dividend growth potential may be limited by the underlying portfolio choice (low-volatility, value-oriented stocks) and by the fact that you’re writing calls rather than capturing all upside.
Because of the call writing, the tax treatment can be more complex (for example more short‐term gains or more complex option accounting) – this can matter for taxable accounts (though I won’t dig too deeply into tax here).

When JEPI Might Make Sense

JEPI is a reasonable choice for an investor whose primary goal is income now and who is less concerned about capturing big upside in a strong bull market. If you expect a sideways or modestly rising market, or if you are nearing or in retirement and want more current cash flow with less equity-risk, then JEPI fits. If you expect a strong equity-upcycle ahead, then you might worry that JEPI will walk into the ceiling created by its option overlay.

Deep-Dive into QDPL

Structure & Strategy

The Pacer Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier 400 ETF (QDPL) launched on July 12, 2021. ETF Database+2Wealth Advisor+2
Its core strategy: invest primarily in U.S. large-cap equities (via the Metaurus US Large Cap Dividend Multiplier Index — Series 400) and enhance dividend yield via dividend futures (or equivalent exposures) rather than the covered-call route. Wealth Advisor+2SwingTradeBot+2
In plain terms: QDPL tries to capture a large portion of equity upside (rather than capping it) while leveraging the dividend stream via dividend futures (buying future dividend payments) to increase current yield beyond what the underlying equities would pay. As one commentary put it, a key differentiator of QDPL (and its sibling QSIX) is “retain a higher level of upside potential compared to covered-call strategies.” Wealth Advisor+1

An example from the Reddit community:

“They don’t use covered calls like SPYI, JEPI, etc. instead they buy dividend futures to multiply the dividends from SPY 4x … Covered calls always cap your upside … this other approach means you always get 90% of the price upside no matter how high SPY … jumps, along with 4x or 6x the dividends.” Reddit+1

Key Statistics

Expense ratio: ~ 0.60% for QDPL. ETF Database+1
As of the cited source, QDPL had assets under management (AUM) ~ $1.29 billion. ETF Database
Number of holdings: ~516 holdings per ETF Database (though the dividend‐multiplier component complicates the holdings picture). ETF Database
Yield: While exact current yield might vary, multiple sources refer to an enhanced dividend yield target (for example “targeting four times the yield of the S&P 500”). Seeking Alpha+1

Strengths

Retains more of the equity upside than a covered-call fund, because the strategy is not capping returns via writes. This is a big point if you believe equities will continue to rally.
Enhanced yield potential without sacrificing much growth: if the dividend futures strategy works and companies continue to raise dividends, you can get both income and growth. The commentary from The Wealth Advisor states:

“The blend of growth and income is particularly appealing in a rising market, where giving up future appreciation for income through covered calls can be limiting.” Wealth Advisor
It offers diversification from the more conventional covered-call quiver. For an income portfolio that wants a fresh approach, QDPL adds optionality.
Dividend multiplier funds can be better suited for inflation / rising rate environments (assuming dividend growth keeps pace) than pure fixed income. Again: from that article:

“With inflation concerns still present … equity-based income strategies become more attractive. … clients looking for higher income might consider transitioning into QDPL … which offer enhanced dividend yields without sacrificing appreciation potential.” Wealth Advisor

Weaknesses

Shorter track record (launched in 2021) so less performance history.
Novelty risk: “dividend futures” is a less familiar mechanism to many retail investors than covered calls; there are execution, rollover, liquidity, and derivative‐counterparty risks.
Expense ratio is higher (0.60%) vs some alternatives (including JEPI at 0.35%).
Because of the nature of multiplier strategies, part of the distribution may include return of capital (ROC) or other elements whose tax treatment may differ – something for taxable accounts to check. Indeed, Reddit commentary remarks:

“part of this dividend distribution of QDPL is return of capital … so how is it better or different from partial selling?” Reddit
If in a severe market downturn and dividends get cut or equity falls hard, the strategy may suffer more than a hedged call-overlay strategy (because the multiplier strategy retains more equity exposure).

When QDPL Makes Sense

QDPL is especially attractive if:

You expect equities to continue appreciating (or at least not collapse) and you don’t want to cap upside with call writing.
You want higher income today but not at the cost of giving up much growth.
You’re comfortable with derivative/structural complexity and willing to hold a fund with less historical track record.
You have a longer investment horizon (so that growth + income blend makes sense) rather than purely immediate income with minimal risk.

Head-to-Head: JEPI vs. QDPL

Here’s how the two compare across major dimensions:

Feature	JEPI	QDPL
Strategy type	Covered call (equity + option overlay) ETF Database+1	Dividend multiplier (equity + dividend futures) Wealth Advisor+1
Yield potential	~8 % (per recent data) StockAnalysis	Targeted to 4× S&P 500 dividend yield; enhanced yield objective Seeking Alpha+1
Equity upside participation	Lower (because of written calls capping some upside)	Higher (retains more equity upside)
Downside cushion	Better buffer via premium income and call overlay	Less buffer; more equity exposure means more risk when market drops
Complexity	Relatively simpler (covered calls are well-understood)	More novel (use of dividend futures, multiplier effect)
Fee	~0.35% ETF Database	~0.60% ETF Database
Track record	Since 2020 (≈5 years) Total Real Returns+1	Since 2021 (≈4 years) ETF Database
Suitability	Income-oriented, moderate risk, may appeal in sideways/flat markets	Income + growth, higher risk/higher potential, suitable for rising markets

From the comparison, if you were to pick purely on who is “better”, one might lean toward QDPL if one believes that the equity market continues to perform well and that dividends will keep/grow — because you get the best of both worlds (income + more upside). Conversely JEPI is more “safe income” oriented, lower upside but more cushion.

But here’s the kicker: the blog post title says “JEPI vs QDPL — Now No Contest: Own The Latter.” In other words, I believe QDPL now holds a clear edge. Below I lay out why I believe the market and macro forces favor QDPL and why JEPI’s edge is shrinking.

Why QDPL Is Now the Better Choice

1. Bull Market Preference and Equity Upside

We are (or at least have been) in a market environment where equities have continued to rally, dividends have been rising (in many cases), and valuations, while high, still allow for further growth. In such an environment, the blunt instrument of covered calls begins to act as a drag rather than a hedge. By capping upside, JEPI may underperform when the broad market moves strongly upward.

In contrast, QDPL is designed to retain much of the equity upside while also delivering enhanced income. The commentary from The Wealth Advisor explicitly states that this is a “key differentiator” versus covered‐call strategies:

“One of the key differentiators of … QDPL … is the ability to retain a higher level of upside potential compared to covered‐call strategies.” Wealth Advisor

In short: if you believe equities are going to keep grinding higher (or at least hold up well), you want to capture that upside. QDPL gives you more of it.

2. Growing Dividend Environment & Inflation Spillover

With inflation still in the background and interest rates elevated (though there are discussions of cuts ahead), fixed income yields are under pressure and investors are hunting for real returns. Dividends from U.S. large-cap companies have been resilient; many companies have increased dividends over time, which plays well into a dividend-multiplier strategy.

QDPL’s approach of leveraging dividend futures means that if companies keep increasing dividends, the value of those futures contracts increases — generating potential upside beyond the base yield. From the article:

“The blend of growth and income is particularly appealing in a rising market … equity-based income strategies become more attractive.” Wealth Advisor

In other words: in an environment where traditional fixed income is yield‐challenged, and inflation persists, the idea of owning an equity fund that gives you elevated yield plus growth becomes more attractive—and QDPL embodies that.

3. The Covered-Call Drag Is Real

Covered-call strategies shine when markets are flat to modestly up, or when volatility is high and premium is rich. But when markets run and premiums shrink relative to underlying equity returns, the cost of giving up upside becomes more painful.

JEPI, by its design of writing calls, will underperform the plain equity market when the equity market rallies strongly. The earlier data comparing JEPI vs SPY show that JEPI’s Sharpe/Sortino/Calmar ratios lag in certain time frames. PortfoliosLab+1

Thus: if you are expecting the market to keep moving higher (which many do, given P/E ratios, earnings growth projections, AI investment wave, etc.), you might prefer not to limit your participation via covered calls.

4. QDPL’s Strategy Is More Flexible and Forward-Looking

While JEPI is constrained by its overlay (you must write calls, accept the cap, etc.), QDPL’s multiplier model gives you more flexibility in capturing upside and dividend growth. The model allows the fund to benefit from raising dividends (via futures) and to participate in large-cap equity growth without the ceiling. The article describing QDPL notes this:

“… investing most of the portfolio in the theme while using a smaller portion of assets to enhance dividend income. … the strategy involves determining how much of the portfolio can be allocated to equities and how much collateral is needed to access dividend futures.” Wealth Advisor

In effect: QDPL is positioned to capture both income and growth, whereas JEPI sacrifices growth for income. Since growth is still likely relevant (and inflation is still alive), the growth component may matter more than ever.

5. Changing Investor Preferences: Income + Growth > Income-Only

Income-only strategies were dominant when interest rates were very low and equity markets were volatile or uncertain. But now, many investors are asking: “Can I get income and growth?” The newer generation of income-oriented ETFs (like QDPL) responds to that. The old model (income-first with limited upside) may be becoming less compelling.

So from an investor psychology and portfolio‐construction lens, QDPL is more aligned with the “income plus growth” theme, while JEPI is more aligned with “income first, growth optional.”

But Wait — What About JEPI’s Advantages? Let’s Be Fair.

Before you dive head-long into QDPL and ditch JEPI, it’s important to recognize that JEPI still holds meaningful value for certain investors and scenarios.

Downside protection: If you believe we are approaching a market correction, or if volatility is going to spike dramatically (and you care more about principal preservation than upside), the covered-call overlay of JEPI offers more built-in cushion. The call premium earned helps mitigate loss in a flat or down market.
Track record & size: JEPI is bigger, more established, more liquid. For many investors and advisors, that matters. The fact that it’s actively managed by a major institution adds comfort.
Simpler structure: Covered calls are a more widely understood strategy in the retail world; dividend futures and multiplier schemes are more novel and may raise questions for some.
Immediate high yield: For pure income-seekers (e.g., retirees who care mostly about monthly income and less about upside), JEPI is still a strong contender.

If your portfolio goal is “generate cash flow now, limit risk, accept that growth will be modest,” then JEPI remains a viable play.

My Verdict: Own QDPL, But Know What You’re Buying

In short: yes, I believe that QDPL currently presents the superior risk/reward combination for many income-seeking investors (especially those who also care about growth). My title “Now No Contest: Own The Latter” reflects the view that the structural headwinds for JEPI (capped upside, covered-call drag) plus the tailwinds for QDPL (dividend growth, equity upside, income + growth) make QDPL the smarter pick now. But I don’t mean to suggest JEPI is useless — it still has its place.

Here are some practical thoughts:

Portfolio construction view

If I’m building a portfolio for an investor who wants “income + some upside,” I’d allocate to QDPL (or a similar dividend-multiplier fund) and hold a smaller position in JEPI (or none) depending on risk tolerance.
If I’m building a more conservative “income only” bucket (for example, for someone nearing or in retirement, whose main risk is losing principal rather than missing upside), JEPI could be considered.
I would not hold both in full size blindly; rather I’d weigh which strategy better aligns with your expectation for the market and your time horizon.

Beware the details

With QDPL, understand the mechanics: how much of the fund is allocated to dividend futures, what portion of distributions are actual dividends vs return of capital, how derivatives are rolled & taxed.
With JEPI, understand the trade-off: high yield now but capped upside, and what happens if the market takes off.
Fees matter: 0.60% vs 0.35% may not be huge in the abstract, but when you compound small drags over years it adds up.
Liquidity, bid/ask spreads, tax treatment — all still matter.
Past performance is not future guarantee (as always). And these are complex strategy funds, meaning more things can go wrong (derivative risk, structural risk, unforeseen market conditions).

Market viewpoint

My take: We live in a world where:

Dividends matter more than they did when interest rates were near zero.
Equities remain expensive but growth drivers (e.g., tech, AI, productivity) are still present; so upside is still plausible.
Income alone (from safe assets) is harder to find without taking meaningful risk.
Inflation/interest rate concerns linger; so strategies that blend growth + income have an edge.

Under those conditions the multiplier strategy that QDPL offers ticks more boxes than the pure income strategy that JEPI leans toward.

Example framing

Imagine you had two friends investing:

Friend A chooses JEPI: great on income now, but if the market rallies 25 % next year, Friend A will not capture all of it because the call overlay limits participation.
Friend B chooses QDPL: perhaps slightly more volatile, fewer downside cushions, but if the market rallies and dividends grow, Friend B stands to capture more of the ride plus good income.

If you believe the next couple of years could have decent equity returns (not just flat), you want to behave like Friend B.

Possible Risks & What Might Go Wrong With My Case

No strategy is foolproof, so let’s map out some scenarios where QDPL might underperform or JEPI might retain the edge.

Market collapse scenario: If equities crash 30-40%, QDPL will suffer more than JEPI because it retains more upside risk (and less built-in premium buffer). In that scenario JEPI could outperform thanks to its premium income and lower volatility orientation.
Dividend cuts / sector stress: If large cap companies cut dividends (for example due to recession, regulatory changes, or earnings decline), QDPL’s dividend-futures strategy may be less effective, and the multiplier may suffer. JEPI’s call premium may provide more cushion.
Premium rich option environment: If option premiums become very large (e.g., volatility spikes), covered call strategies like JEPI could get large income boosts and might outperform in income terms.
Unexpected structural issues with dividend futures: Because QDPL relies on less-tested strategies, if there are liquidity or derivative risks, it could underperform or break from expectation.
Higher fees & drag: The higher expense ratio for QDPL (0.60%) versus JEPI (0.35%) means the hurdle is higher. If upside is moderate rather than strong, the extra cost might not pay off.
Investor behavior / tax effects: If your personal tax or cash-flow situation prefers monthly high yield with minimal volatility, you might lean toward JEPI’s model.

So: if you believe the near future is challenging for equities (flat to down), then JEPI might be the prudent choice. My bet is the opposite—that we will continue to live in an environment where growth remains plausible and dividends remain resilient—hence QDPL.

Practical Takeaways for Investors & Bloggers

Given your blog-writing background, here are some tips on how to translate this comparison into actionable content for your readers:

Frame the investor mindset: Explain the difference between “need income now” vs “income plus growth” mindset. Many retail investors default to one without realizing the trade-off.
Use clear analogies: For example: “Covered calls are like selling tickets to your best concert seat—you get paid now but can’t enjoy the full show if the band rocks out. Dividend multipliers are like buying a VIP pass—you get access to the full show plus extra perks.”
Include scenario tables: Show how each fund might perform in a flat market, a +20 % market, or a -30 % market. This helps readers understand trade-offs.
Highlight mechanics: Because many readers may not understand option overlays or dividend futures, include short sidebars: e.g., “What is a covered call?” “What are dividend futures?”
Tax and margin disclaimers: Remind readers that derivative strategies may have unusual tax and risk characteristics.
Portfolio fit discussion: Rather than “this one is better,” talk about “which one fits you.” For example, risk tolerance, horizon, tax status, other assets.
Use real data but caveat it: Show yield comparisons, expense ratios, past performance—but always include the cc: “past performance is no guarantee”.
Be transparent about limitations: When you argue for QDPL, also acknowledge the risks. That builds credibility.
Call to action: Invite readers to review their income portfolios, ask whether they are giving up too much upside, or whether they’re sacrificing too much income for growth.

Conclusion

In the debate between JEPI and QDPL, I conclude that the clear winner right now is QDPL—for the majority of income-plus-growth oriented investors. Why? Because the conditions (equity upside still plausible, dividends resilient, income scarce, inflation still present) favor a strategy that retains upside and boosts yield. QDPL delivers that more cleanly than JEPI’s covered-call overlay.

That said, JEPI remains a strong tool in the toolkit—especially for more conservative investors, those near retirement, or those who expect a rough patch ahead and prefer the safety buffer of option premium.

If I were to pick one right now and hold long-term, it would be QDPL. I’d monitor its performance, ensure I’m comfortable with the underlying mechanics, and pair it within a diversified portfolio with an eye on risk (portfolio weight sizing, alternative assets, etc.).