Dividend comparison
GPIQ vs JEPI: Which Is Better for Income?
Fees, yield, total returns, drawdowns, holdings overlap and dividend history for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF and JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF, side by side. Updated October 23, 2026.
- Fees. Both charge about 0.35% a year, so cost is not what separates them.
- Income. GPIQ pays more income, yielding 10.45% over the last twelve months versus 7.97% for JEPI. That is about $248 more a year on $10,000. Both pay monthly.
- Performance. Over the last 3 years, GPIQ returned 587.4% versus 28.9% for JEPI, with dividends reinvested. $10,000 would have grown to $68,742 in GPIQ and $12,894 in JEPI.
- Risk. GPIQ has been the bumpier ride. Its worst peak-to-trough decline over the last 3 years was -100.0%, against -13.7% for JEPI.
- Diversification. JEPI holds 135 positions and GPIQ holds 107. The ten largest positions make up 48.0% of GPIQ and 18.4% of JEPI.
- Overlap. At least 27% of the two portfolios overlap by weight, across 32 shared holdings.
- Size. JEPI is the larger fund with $45.9 billion in assets, against $6.4 billion for GPIQ.
Bottom line: GPIQ fits better if you care most about more income today and stronger 3-year returns. JEPI fits better if you care most about smaller drawdowns.
| Metric | GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Premium Income ETF | JEPI JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF |
|---|---|---|
| Dividend yield (TTM) | 10.45% | 7.97% |
| Dividend / share (TTM) | $5.77 | $4.56 |
| Payout frequency | Monthly | Monthly |
| Last dividend | $0.5088 on Oct 7, 2026 | $0.3413 on Oct 5, 2026 |
| Ex-dividend date | Oct 1, 2026 | Oct 1, 2026 |
| Dividend growth (CAGR) | — | 2.5% over 4 yrs |
| Price | $55.20 | $57.29 |
| Dividend growth streak | 1 year | 1 year |
| Beta | 1.16 | 0.43 |
| Max drawdown (5Y) | -100.0% | -13.7% |
| Market cap | $1.19B | $45.72B |
| Exchange | NASDAQ | AMEX |
| Expense ratio | 0.35% | 0.35% |
| Assets under management | $6.42B | $45.93B |
| Number of holdings | 107 | 135 |
| Top 10 concentration | 48.0% | 18.4% |
GPIQ
$87.04/mo
$1045 /yr at 10.45% yield
JEPI
$66.38/mo
$797 /yr at 7.97% yield
| Year | GPIQ | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | $5.1860 | $4.6876 |
| 2024 | $4.8875 | $4.2494 |
| 2023 | — | $4.7634 |
| 2022 | — | $6.2478 |
| 2021 | — | $4.2455 |
Payouts are variable rather than contractual, are often taxed as ordinary income, and a fund that pays out more than the strategy earns will see its net asset value drift down over time.
What GPIQ vs JEPI actually do
Rather than overwriting the whole portfolio every month, the manager sells calls against roughly 25% to 75% of the equity exposure and adjusts that share with market conditions. Leaving part of the book uncovered is the deliberate design choice: it produces a smaller distribution than a full overwrite but keeps more of a rally. Fees sit well below most options-income peers, which matters over time in a category where the overlay already caps returns.
Suits an investor who wants Nasdaq-100 income but is not willing to give up the whole upside to get the highest headline yield. Less suitable for someone comparing purely on distribution rate, since a partial overwrite by design pays less than a full one.
Balanced income and growth
The equity sleeve is picked from S&P 500 names screened for lower volatility and quality rather than for dividend yield, so it usually moves like a calmer version of the index. Separately the fund holds equity-linked notes whose payoff comes from writing roughly one-month, slightly out-of-the-money calls on the S&P 500 itself, not on the individual stocks it owns. The premium from those notes is distributed monthly, which is why the payout is far larger than the dividends the underlying companies actually pay.
Suits an investor who wants a large monthly cash payment from US large caps and accepts a trimmed share of any strong rally. It fits badly in a high-bracket taxable account, since option income arrives as ordinary income, and badly for an account whose only job is long-run growth.
Moderate-risk equity income
| Period | GPIQ | JEPI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 month | -5.38% | 0.97% |
| 3 months | -2.73% | 1.13% |
| Year to date | 5.32% | 0.09% |
| 1 year | 7.00% | 1.25% |
| 3 years | 587.42% | 28.94% |
| 5 years | — | 33.05% |
- GPIQ
- JEPI
Both series indexed to 100 on 2023-10-19 using the adjusted closing price series. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
- GPIQ
- JEPI
| Largest shared holdings | GPIQ weight | JEPI weight |
|---|---|---|
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORPORATION | 6.17% | 1.98% |
| AAPLAPPLE INC. | 7.79% | 1.94% |
| AMZNAMAZON.COM INC | 4.32% | 1.90% |
| NVDANVIDIA CORPORATION | 8.31% | 1.83% |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC-CLASS A | 3.28% | 1.77% |
| GOOGLALPHABET INC. | 3.82% | 1.67% |
| AVGOBROADCOM INC. | 2.53% | 1.58% |
| COSTCOSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION | 2.05% | 1.55% |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH CORPORATION | 1.43% | 1.32% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC. | 3.89% | 1.02% |
GPIQ107 holdings total
JEPI135 holdings total
| Name | Weight |
|---|---|
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP COMMON | 1.98% |
| AAPLAPPLE INC COMMON STOCK | 1.94% |
| MAMASTERCARD INC COMMON | 1.92% |
| AMZNAMAZON.COM INC COMMON | 1.90% |
| VVISA INC COMMON STOCK | 1.83% |
| NVDANVIDIA CORP COMMON STOCK | 1.83% |
| MMM3M CO COMMON STOCK USD | 1.78% |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 1.77% |
| ABBVABBVIE INC COMMON STOCK | 1.74% |
| EOGEOG RESOURCES INC COMMON | 1.70% |
Quick verdict
GPIQ fits better if you care most about more income today and stronger 3-year returns. JEPI fits better if you care most about smaller drawdowns. Model the holding inside your real portfolio before deciding.
Frequently asked questions
Is GPIQ or JEPI better for dividend income?
What is the difference between GPIQ and JEPI?
Which is cheaper, GPIQ or JEPI?
Which has performed better, GPIQ or JEPI?
Which is riskier, GPIQ or JEPI?
How much do GPIQ and JEPI overlap?
How often do GPIQ and JEPI pay dividends?
How much income does $10,000 in GPIQ vs JEPI generate?
Can I hold both GPIQ and JEPI?
Where can I compare GPIQ vs JEPI with my full portfolio?
Related comparisons
For informational and educational purposes only. Not investment advice. Past performance and current yields do not guarantee future results. Verify figures independently before making investment decisions.