FLV vs JAVA
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF vs JPMorgan Active Value ETF
Which is better, FLV or JAVA?
JAVA has been ahead.
FLV has a lower expense ratio. JAVA led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. JAVA is less concentrated, with 29.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 32.6%.
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 | FLV | JAVA |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.42%Best | 0.44% |
| AUM | $379M | $7.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.73% | 1.19% |
| Holdings | 56 | 153 |
| YTD Return | +12.50% | +13.15%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.84% | +20.54%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.33% | +18.31%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.83% | +11.63%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3%Best | 14.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.1%Best | -16.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,981 | $17,334Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.6% | 29.8%Best |
| Fund Family | American Century ETFs | J.P. Morgan Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Mar 31, 2020 | Oct 4, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 5, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5 years).
FLV vs JAVA 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 5 years both funds cover.
FLV vs JAVA Performance
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) is an ETF from American Century ETFs and JPMorgan Active Value ETF (JAVA) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Over the past year FLV returned +16.84% while JAVA returned +20.54%. Year to date, FLV is up 12.50% versus a gain of 13.15% for JAVA.
Over three years, FLV compounded at +16.33% per year against +18.31% for JAVA; over five years the annualized figures are +9.83% and +11.63% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JAVA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.4% compared with 13.3% for FLV. 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 -15.1% for FLV and -16.5% for JAVA. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLV charges 0.42% per year while JAVA charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $42 vs $44 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLV currently yields 1.73% against 1.19% for JAVA.
Holdings Overlap
28.5% of FLV's money is in holdings JAVA also owns. 26.8% of JAVA's money is in holdings FLV also owns.
FLV and JAVA share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 98 days apart, FLV as of Jun 30, 2026 and JAVA as of Oct 6, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
13 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 151 in JAVA, against full books of 56 and 153.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 137 positions for JAVA that do not appear in our book for FLV (72.9% of the fund), and 35 for FLV that do not appear in JAVA (64.7%).
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 FLV | Weight in JAVA | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.07% | 7.63% | 4.56% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.46% | 6.29% | 2.83% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.58% | 3.41% | 0.83% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 3.28% | 1.26% | 2.02% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 2.07% | 1.65% | 0.42% |
| BDXBecton Dickinson And Co. | 3.20% | 0.32% | 2.88% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 2.22% | 1.21% | 1.01% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group Incorporated | 2.22% | 1.18% | 1.04% |
| ADIAnalog Devices, Inc. | 2.25% | 0.95% | 1.30% |
| RTXRaytheon Co. | 1.31% | 0.97% | 0.34% |
28.5% of FLV is already inside JAVA.
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, FLV or JAVA?
FLV has an expense ratio of 0.42% while JAVA charges 0.44%. FLV is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLV or JAVA?
Over the past year FLV returned +16.84% vs +20.54% for JAVA, so JAVA leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLV or JAVA?
JAVA has been the more volatile fund at 14.4% annualized versus 13.3% for FLV. Worst drawdown: FLV -15.1% vs JAVA -16.5%.
Should I hold both FLV and JAVA?
FLV and JAVA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FLV and JAVA?
28.5% of FLV's money is in holdings JAVA also owns. 26.8% of JAVA's is in holdings FLV also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 151 in JAVA.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLV or JAVA?
FLV yields 1.73% while JAVA yields 1.19%, so FLV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is JAVA better than FLV?
FLV has a lower expense ratio. JAVA led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. JAVA is less concentrated, with 29.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 32.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.