DV
Dividend Vision

ETF Comparison

IWMI vs JEPQ: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?

A head-to-head comparison of NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF and JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.

Updated October 2, 2026

How these figures are calculated: methodology.

Best for

  • IWMIInvestors who want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment.
  • JEPQInvestors who want an actively selected equity book whose calls are sold through equity-linked notes, and accept ordinary-income treatment of that overlay.

Jump to the side-by-side numbers

Visual comparison

Key metrics

Projected income on $10K

Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.

Total returns

100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.

IWMI has lagged JEPQ over the trailing twelve months, posting a 17.26% total return against 19.92%. Measured from Jun 2024 — the start of shared available history — JEPQ has compounded at 17.24% a year versus 15.53% for IWMI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.

Total return and risk statistics by fund. Each row is one fund; each column is one period or statistic.
SymbolYTD cumulative1Y cumulativeSince Jun 2024Volatility Sharpe Sortino Max drawdown
IWMI12.33%17.26%15.53%15.0%0.761.11-8.4%
JEPQ14.90%19.92%17.24%14.8%0.921.33-8.8%

Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of October 2, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jun 2024” measures every fund from June 25, 2024 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the past year. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the past year) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.

Distribution rate and SEC yield

MetricIWMIJEPQ
Forward distribution rate14.73%11.14%
Trailing 12-month yield14.67%11.28%
30-day SEC yield0.52%—

Total return (price change plus reinvested distributions) is the Total returns section above. A 30-day SEC yield can sit far from the headline distribution rate; both numbers are the fund's own published fields.

Total return against the stated underlying is on IWMI vs IWM, JEPQ vs QQQ.

Side-by-side snapshot

Side-by-side snapshot. Each row is one metric; each column is one fund.
MetricIWMIJEPQ
Full nameNEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETFJPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
IssuerNEOSJPMorgan
Underlying indexRussell 2000 IndexNasdaq-100
Last Close$49.48 as of October 2, 2026$61.04 as of October 2, 2026
Distribution rate14.73%11.14%
Trailing 12-month yield14.67%11.28%
30-day SEC yield0.52%—
Distribution Safety Score™ 8490
Safety-Adjusted Yield 12.37%10.03%
Expense ratio0.68%0.35%
AUM$1.29B$43.9B
Distribution frequencyMonthlyMonthly
ObjectiveIWMI is built to crank out high monthly income while staying tax-efficient. The fund invests in Russell 2000 stocks and layers on a data-driven call option strategy. That combo gives it steady cash flow and a chance to grab some upside if the Russell 2000 rallies. For tax perks, it uses section 1256 index options (with the sweet 60/40 long-term vs short-term split) and fund managers may also harvest losses to soften the tax bite. Quick summary: * Goal: High monthly income + equity growth potential * Method: Russell 2000 holdings + call option overlay * Upside: Participates when RUT rises * Tax angle: 60/40 capital gains treatment + loss harvestingSeeks monthly income by combining an actively managed portfolio of equities drawn largely from the Nasdaq-100 Index with equity-linked notes that sell call options on that benchmark.
Asset classEquityEquity
Inception date06/24/202405/03/2022
Beta1.05820.81
Last dividend$0.6075$0.56687 declared, pays 10/05/2026
Ex-dividend date09/16/202610/01/2026

Bottom lineChoose IWMI if you want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment. Choose JEPQ if you want an actively selected equity book whose calls are sold through equity-linked notes, and accept ordinary-income treatment of that overlay. IWMI and JEPQ both use option or derivative overlays. Their tradeoff is the underlying exposure, how each option strategy is implemented, and the yield each targets; either overlay can limit upside participation, so neither offers uncapped price exposure.

How the risk works

Read this before the income numbers below: the strategy mechanics on this page shape what those payouts can cost you.

  • Capped upside and premium dependence. IWMI and JEPQ generate income by selling options, which trades away part of a strong rally in exchange for premium. Distributions can include return of capital, and a payout the underlying assets cannot sustain shows up as NAV erosion over time — the big yield number is not free.

Learn the mechanics: Return of capital, explained · NAV erosion, explained

Model this comparison:
Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Income calculator

See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.

NEOS
ETFs19
Total AUM$34.7B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

NEOS is known for developing specialized income-focused ETFs that employ strategies like covered calls, hedging, and enhanced yields across various asset classes. The firm manages 19 funds organized into nine distinct families, including offerings in equity high income, fixed income enhancement, digital assets, and alternative strategies, with popular tickers like SPYI (S&P 500 covered call), QQQI (Nasdaq-100 covered call), and QQQH (Nasdaq-100 hedged equity income). NEOS distinguishes itself in the ETF landscape through its emphasis on income generation and downside protection strategies rather than traditional growth approaches.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on IWMI.

See all NEOS ETFs
JPMorgan
ETFs78
Total AUM$350B

ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.

JPMorgan is a major provider of ETFs spanning multiple asset classes and strategies, with particular strength in income-focused funds including their popular covered call strategy lineup. Their fund family encompasses broad categories including bond, equity, factor, income, index, international, municipal, and sector ETFs, providing investors with diverse exposure options across markets and investment styles. The issuer offers both core indexed strategies and actively managed solutions, serving investors seeking everything from traditional dividend income to sophisticated factor-based and thematic approaches.

See our curated list of related YouTube videos on JEPQ.

See all JPMorgan ETFs

Want to go deeper?

Add these ETFs to a sample portfolio and forecast your dividend income over 5+ years — free to start, no credit card.

Compare in my portfolio Forecast income Save to watchlist

Quick verdict

IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) and JEPQ (JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.

IWMI offers the higher yield at 14.73% vs 11.14% for JEPQ. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.

JEPQ is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.35% compared to 0.68%.

They have different reference exposures: IWMI is linked to Russell 2000 Index while JEPQ is linked to Nasdaq-100, which means their performance drivers differ.

JEPQ is the larger fund by assets ($43.9B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.

Who should choose each?

Choose IWMI

NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF

  • Want index call spreads structured for Section 1256 tax treatment.
  • Want to maximize current income — IWMI distributes roughly 14.73% from selling options premium, vs 11.14% for JEPQ.
  • Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.

Choose JEPQ

JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF

  • Want equity-linked notes as the income engine, with ordinary-income treatment.
  • Are comfortable with an options-income strategy — a large payout in exchange for capped upside.
  • Want to keep costs low — a 0.35% expense ratio vs 0.68% for IWMI.
  • Prefer lower volatility — a beta of 0.8 vs 1.1 for IWMI.

Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.

Deep dive

Yield & income

On a $10,000 investment, IWMI would generate roughly $122.75 cash per distribution, while JEPQ would produce $92.83 cash per distribution, at current distribution rates. Both pay monthly distributions.

IWMI yield14.73%
JEPQ yield11.14%
Cash diff on $10K$29.92

Cost & efficiency

Over 10 years on $10,000, IWMI would cost approximately $680 in fees vs $350 for JEPQ (simplified, not compounded). The $330.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.

IWMI ER0.68%
JEPQ ER0.35%

Strategy & risk

IWMI tracks Russell 2000 Index with an options approach, while JEPQ is actively managed around Nasdaq-100 exposure with a covered call approach. Beta is 1.0582 for IWMI and 0.81 for JEPQ, making JEPQ the less volatile of the two by this measure.

IWMI beta1.0582
JEPQ beta0.81

Fund details

IWMI is managed by NEOS (launched 06/24/2024) with $1.29B in assets. JEPQ is managed by JPMorgan (launched 05/03/2022) with $43.9B in assets.

IWMI AUM$1.29B
JEPQ AUM$43.9B
Ready to act?
Open in Comparator Model in portfolio See pricing

Enjoyed this page?

Do us a favor — if you found this comparison useful, please share it with a friend researching dividend ETFs.

Frequently asked questions

What is the current distribution rate for IWMI and JEPQ?

IWMI currently distributes 14.73% and JEPQ 11.14%, based on fund data updated October 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.

Is IWMI or JEPQ better for dividend income?

It depends on your goals. IWMI currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.

What is the difference between IWMI and JEPQ?

IWMI (NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF) tracks Russell 2000 Index with an options approach, while JEPQ (JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF) is actively managed around Nasdaq-100 exposure with a covered call approach. They are issued by NEOS and JPMorgan respectively.

Can I hold both IWMI and JEPQ?

Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.

Is IWMI or JEPQ safer?

By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — JEPQ scores 90, IWMI scores 84, so JEPQ's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. JEPQ has also shown lower price volatility (beta 0.81 vs 1.06 for IWMI). No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee, and the leverage, options-income, or crypto caveats flagged on this page apply regardless of score.

Which has lower fees, IWMI or JEPQ?

IWMI has an expense ratio of 0.68% while JEPQ charges 0.35%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.

How much income does $10,000 in IWMI vs JEPQ generate?

At current rates, $10,000 in IWMI would generate roughly $122.75 cash per distribution ($1,473.00 annually). The same in JEPQ would produce about $92.83 cash per distribution ($1,114.00 annually).

Which has performed better historically, IWMI or JEPQ?

IWMI has lagged JEPQ over the trailing twelve months, posting a 17.26% total return against 19.92%. Measured from Jun 2024 — the start of shared available history — JEPQ has compounded at 17.24% a year versus 15.53% for IWMI. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

More comparisons to explore

IWMI vs JEPQ — at a glance

Generated October 3, 2026.

Overview

IWMI and JEPQ are both equity ETFs that overlay call option strategies to generate monthly income, but they target different market segments and employ different structures. IWMI focuses on Russell 2000 small-cap stocks with a systematic, rules-based option approach; JEPQ holds an actively managed portfolio tilted toward Nasdaq-100 large-cap growth stocks and uses equity-linked notes to monetize calls. The key distinction is market exposure: IWMI is small-cap value-tilted, while JEPQ is large-cap growth-tilted, and that difference drives their yield, risk profile, and tax treatment.

How they differ

The largest difference is underlying market exposure. IWMI invests in Russell 2000 stocks and applies a mechanical call-selling overlay, while JEPQ holds an actively managed Nasdaq-100–focused portfolio via equity-linked notes. That translates to starkly different sector and size profiles: IWMI beta is 1.0582 versus JEPQ at 0.81, reflecting small-cap volatility against large-cap stability.

Yield is the second distinction. IWMI distributes at 14.73%, significantly higher than JEPQ's 11.14%, partly because small-cap call premium is richer but also because the distribution may include more return-of-capital elements. JEPQ's lower expense ratio of 0.35% versus IWMI's 0.68% partially offsets the yield gap but does not close it.

The third difference is tax structure. IWMI explicitly leverages section 1256 index options (taxed 60/40 long-term/short-term) and loss harvesting, while JEPQ uses equity-linked notes that sidestep that framework entirely and may generate more ordinary-income distributions.

Who each is best for

IWMI: Fits investors seeking maximum monthly income from small-cap equity exposure and comfortable with the higher volatility (beta 1.0582) and call-cap drag that come with Russell 2000 exposure. Also suited to those focused on federal tax efficiency through favorable derivatives treatment.

JEPQ: Designed for income investors preferring large-cap, growth-leaning equity stability (beta 0.81) with lower expense drag (0.35%) and a higher-conviction active management layer. Fits investors whose priority is steadier volatility over maximum yield.

Key risks to know

  • Call cap drag and upside capture: IWMI's small-cap call overlay will cap gains if the Russell 2000 rallies sharply; JEPQ similarly limits upside on Nasdaq-100 moves. Both funds trade total return for income, so a prolonged rally leaves both underperforming their underlying benchmark.
  • NAV erosion at elevated distribution yields: IWMI's 14.73% yield (annualized) is unusually high for an equity fund and likely includes meaningful return-of-capital elements, implying steady principal reduction unless underlying holdings grow enough to offset it. Monitor NAV drift over quarters.
  • Small-cap volatility and liquidity (IWMI): Beta 1.0582 implies IWMI will swing sharply in down markets and tracking errors may widen during liquidity stress. Russell 2000 options liquidity is thinner than Nasdaq-100, raising execution costs.
  • Active management concentration risk (JEPQ): JEPQ's active manager may tilt away from index weights, creating factor or sector bets not apparent from the Nasdaq-100 label alone. Overlap with IWMI holdings is likely minimal, but overlap with other Nasdaq-100 strategies may be significant.
  • Equity-linked note counterparty risk (JEPQ): JEPQ's use of equity-linked notes introduces issuer credit risk; if JPMorgan or its counterparty faces stress, payout mechanics may become opaque during market stress.

Bottom line

If you want maximum monthly income and can tolerate small-cap volatility and potential NAV drift, IWMI's 14.73% yield and tax-efficient structure stand out. If you prioritize lower volatility (beta 0.81 vs. 1.0582), lower expenses (0.35% vs. 0.68%), and a larger, more-established fund ($43.9B vs. $1.29B), JEPQ offers a more conservative income approach tilted to large-cap growth. Both funds carry call-cap risk and potential principal erosion; past performance does not predict future results.

AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.

Learn the method

The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.

How covered-call funds work How to read a fund's stats The covered-call opportunity cost T-bills vs. money market funds vs. CDs

Still deciding? Compare them against your own portfolio

See how each ETF fits alongside your real holdings — forecast future income, analyze overlap, and gauge risk. Start a free 7-day Dividend Vision trial and make the call with your full portfolio in view.

Start Free Open in Comparator Browse Screener

These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.