Best SPMO Alternatives in 2026

This category of momentum-factor ETFs offers alternatives to SPMO by tracking similar high-momentum equity strategies through different index methodologies and issuer approaches. iShares' MTUM dominates by size at $24.0B in AUM, dwarfing the next-largest fund, JPMorgan's JMOM at $2.7B, suggesting the category's assets are heavily concentrated in one established, long-running product. The remaining seven funds span a wide range of scale, from VFMO at $1.9B down to AMOM at just $22M, with issuers including Vanguard, Invesco, Fidelity, Alpha Architect, State Street, and Exchange Traded Concepts each offering a distinct take on momentum investing. Distribution frequency is split between quarterly (most funds) and annual (QMOM only), and yields are generally modest, consistent with a factor-based equity strategy rather than an income-focused one.

• ONEO and MMTM, both State Street funds, post the highest yields in the group at 1.22% and 1.14% respectively, despite being among the smallest funds shown by AUM.
• JMOM combines a low 0.12% expense ratio with a 0.74% yield, illustrating a relatively favorable cost-to-yield profile among the larger funds in this set.
• AMOM and PDP show the lowest yields in the category at 0.03% and 0.08%, paired with the two highest expense ratios at 0.75% and 0.62%.
• Among quarterly-pay funds, JMOM, VFMO, and MMTM tie for the lowest expense ratio at 0.12%, while AMOM carries the highest at 0.75%.
• Average category yield of 0.66% sits well below what income-focused investors typically seek, reflecting this category's growth/factor orientation rather than a dividend-income mandate.

Momentum strategies inherently involve higher turnover and can underperform sharply during market rotations away from trending stocks, a risk not captured by yield or expense ratio alone. Expense ratios vary meaningfully across the group, from 0.12% to 0.75%, which may affect long-term net returns independent of yield differences.

• Strategy mismatch: several funds on this list track a different index or use a different income mechanism than SPMO, so swapping into one changes the exposure — upside participation, payout cadence, and tax character can all shift, not just the ticker.
• Liquidity and closure risk: 2 of the 9 funds listed hold under $100M in assets, and small funds tend to trade with wider bid-ask spreads and face a higher risk of liquidation.
• Distributions are not contractual: each payout is declared period by period, so the yields on this page can fall without notice when portfolio income, option premium, or fund policy changes.
• Methodology divergence: every fund here follows its own index rules or mandate, so two funds with similar headline yields can hold very different portfolios and diverge sharply in a drawdown — category membership is not interchangeability.
• Screens react after the fact: a fund's place in this list is re-rated only once a dividend cut, strategy change, or asset decline has already shown up in the reported data.

• Universe: a hand-curated peer set, split into close peers (9 here — same core exposure and same income mechanism, so a like-for-like swap) and broader substitutes (a different index, underlying asset, or income mechanism). Every fund is labelled in the Strategy fit column; SPMO itself is excluded.
• Eligibility: active ETFs only — liquidated, delisted, and renamed funds drop out automatically. Leveraged and inverse products are never listed: a daily-reset 2x or -1x fund is not an alternative to a long income position.
• Ranking: assets under management, used only as a fund-size ranking. Never ranked by yield — yields are shown as data, not used to order the list.
• Fit: how each fund's strategy differs from SPMO — and who each one suits — is covered in the strategy notes and FAQ below.