BBEM vs TYLG
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF vs Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
BBEM has a lower expense ratio. TYLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. BBEM offers more diversification with 1,132 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BBEM | TYLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $748M | $14M | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 7.86% | |
| Holdings | 1,132 | 77 | |
| YTD Return | +17.70% | +23.42% | |
| 1Y Return | +32.31% | +34.52% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.70% | +23.95% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -17.4% | -24.5% | |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 10, 2023 | Nov 21, 2022 |
BBEM vs TYLG Performance
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) is a ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and Global X Information Technology Covered Call & Growth ETF (TYLG) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year BBEM returned +32.31% while TYLG returned +34.52%. Year to date, BBEM is up 17.70% versus a gain of 23.42% for TYLG.
Over three years, BBEM compounded at +20.70% per year against +23.95% for TYLG. Across the full 3-year window we track, TYLG has the edge at +25.90% annualized vs +20.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TYLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 15.1% for BBEM. 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 -17.4% for BBEM and -24.5% for TYLG. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.66. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BBEM charges 0.15% per year while TYLG charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $60 annually, a gap of $45 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BBEM currently yields 2.52% against 7.86% for TYLG.
Holdings Overlap
BBEM and TYLG share 0 holdings out of 948 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BBEM or TYLG?
BBEM has an expense ratio of 0.15% while TYLG charges 0.60%. BBEM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $45 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BBEM or TYLG?
Over the past year BBEM returned +32.31% vs +34.52% for TYLG, so TYLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), BBEM annualized +20.03% vs +25.90% for TYLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BBEM or TYLG?
TYLG has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 15.1% for BBEM. Worst drawdown: BBEM -17.4% vs TYLG -24.5%.
Should I hold both BBEM and TYLG?
BBEM and TYLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.66, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BBEM and TYLG?
BBEM and TYLG share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 948 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BBEM or TYLG?
BBEM yields 2.52% while TYLG yields 7.86%, so TYLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.