JVAL vs ULVM
JPMorgan US Value Factor ETF vs VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF
Which is better, JVAL or ULVM?
Nearly the same fund. JVAL costs less.
JVAL has a lower expense ratio. JVAL led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 18.6%.
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 | JVAL | ULVM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.12%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $1.0B | $260M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.61% | 1.81% |
| Holdings | 797 | 126 |
| YTD Return | +18.89%Best | +13.74% |
| 1Y Return | +24.99%Best | +17.70% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.18%Best | +21.11% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.28%Best | +11.11% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.1% | 17.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.4%Best | -40.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,845Best | $16,934 |
| Top 10 Weight | 18.6% | 13.6%Best |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Victory Capital Management Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Nov 8, 2017 | Oct 24, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 9, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.9 years).
JVAL vs ULVM 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 8.9 years both funds cover.
JVAL vs ULVM Performance
JPMorgan US Value Factor ETF (JVAL) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF (ULVM) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc.. Over the past year JVAL returned +24.99% while ULVM returned +17.70%. Year to date, JVAL is up 18.89% versus a gain of 13.74% for ULVM.
Over three years, JVAL compounded at +21.18% per year against +21.11% for ULVM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.28% and +11.11% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, JVAL has the edge at +11.54% annualized vs +9.69%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JVAL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.1% compared with 17.0% for ULVM. 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 -40.4% for JVAL and -40.8% for ULVM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JVAL charges 0.12% per year while ULVM charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $12 vs $20 annually, a gap of $8 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JVAL currently yields 1.61% against 1.81% for ULVM.
Holdings Overlap
28.4% of JVAL's money is in holdings ULVM also owns. 65.6% of ULVM's money is in holdings JVAL also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
85 positions in common, counted across the 393 positions we hold weights for in JVAL and 125 in ULVM, against full books of 797 and 126.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 36 positions for ULVM that do not appear in our book for JVAL (31.6% of the fund), and 297 for JVAL that do not appear in ULVM (70.1%).
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 JVAL | Weight in ULVM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cap Stk Cl A | 2.10% | 0.78% | 1.32% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.63% | 1.19% | 0.44% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.17% | 0.35% | 1.82% |
| PFEPfizer, Inc. | 0.54% | 1.12% | 0.58% |
| EVRGEvergy Inc Sedol Bfmxgr0 | 0.21% | 1.44% | 1.23% |
| EDConsolidated Edison Inc. | 0.25% | 1.38% | 1.13% |
| SPGSimon Property Group Inc | 0.33% | 1.20% | 0.87% |
| CCitigroup, Inc. | 0.68% | 0.78% | 0.10% |
| BACBank Of America Corp. | 0.46% | 0.99% | 0.53% |
| PFGPrincipalfinancialgroupinc. | 0.25% | 1.17% | 0.92% |
65.6% of ULVM is already inside JVAL.
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, JVAL or ULVM?
JVAL has an expense ratio of 0.12% while ULVM charges 0.20%. JVAL is the cheaper option, by $8 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JVAL or ULVM?
Over the past year JVAL returned +24.99% vs +17.70% for ULVM, so JVAL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), JVAL annualized +11.54% vs +9.69% for ULVM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JVAL or ULVM?
JVAL has been the more volatile fund at 18.1% annualized versus 17.0% for ULVM. Worst drawdown: JVAL -40.4% vs ULVM -40.8%.
Should I hold both JVAL and ULVM?
JVAL and ULVM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, 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 JVAL and ULVM?
65.6% of ULVM's money is in holdings JVAL also owns. 65.6% of ULVM's is in holdings JVAL also owns. They hold 85 positions in common, counted across the 393 positions we hold weights for in JVAL and 125 in ULVM.
Which pays a higher dividend, JVAL or ULVM?
JVAL yields 1.61% while ULVM yields 1.81%, so ULVM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ULVM better than JVAL?
JVAL has a lower expense ratio. JVAL led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 18.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.