FZROX vs JEPQ: 46% overlap
Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index and JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF share 46.0% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published 30 days apart — JEPQ as of 2026-03-31, the rest through 2026-04-30. Each fund is compared using its most recent file, so any trading in between shows up as a difference.
You would hold two tickers and get the diversification of 1.5. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
FZROX and JEPQ hold 89 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in FZROX | in JEPQ | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 6.9% | 7.3% | 0.4% |
| AAPL | 5.7% | 6.4% | 0.7% |
| MSFT | 4.3% | 4.8% | 0.5% |
| AMZN | 3.7% | 4.0% | 0.3% |
| GOOG | 2.6% | 5.1% | 2.5% |
| AVGO | 2.8% | 2.2% | 0.6% |
| META | 1.9% | 3.0% | 1.1% |
| TSLA | 1.5% | 2.6% | 1.1% |
| MU | 0.8% | 2.0% | 1.2% |
| WMT | 0.8% | 2.5% | 1.6% |
Where FZROX and JEPQ differ
Sector weights as a share of each fund, ordered by the size of the gap rather than the size of the sector — two funds that overlap heavily still usually diverge somewhere.
| Sector | FZROX | JEPQ | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified | 3.8% | 22.3% | −18.5pp |
| Financials | 11.8% | 0.5% | +11.3pp |
| Industrials | 9.2% | 1.7% | +7.5pp |
| Information Technology | 32.3% | 37.9% | −5.6pp |
| Health Care | 8.6% | 4.2% | +4.4pp |
| Energy | 3.5% | 0.4% | +3.2pp |
| Real Estate | 2.3% | 0.2% | +2.1pp |
| Communication Services | 10.1% | 12.0% | −1.9pp |
Δ is FZROX minus JEPQ, in percentage points. Sector data is not published by every issuer, so “Unclassified” is a real category rather than a gap in the table.
What each fund holds alone
52.1% of FZROX by weight, held in no part of JEPQ.
18.9% of JEPQ by weight, held in no part of FZROX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| FZROX | JEPQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 34.0% | 40.0% |
| Positions held | 2,685 | 108 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $0 | $35 |
Cost is the expense ratio applied to $10,000; it excludes any brokerage commission, bid-ask spread or tax consequence. Figures are facts about the funds, not a suggestion about which to hold.
Frequently asked
How much do FZROX and JEPQ overlap?
FZROX and JEPQ overlap 46.0% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 89 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (FZROX as of 2026-04-30, JEPQ as of 2026-03-31).
How is the overlap between FZROX and JEPQ calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If FZROX holds a stock at 6% and JEPQ holds the same stock at 4%, 4% counts as shared. The result is bounded between 0% and 100%, and it is computed after looking through any fund-of-funds to the underlying holdings.
Is it redundant to hold both FZROX and JEPQ?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 46.0% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does FZROX own that JEPQ doesn't?
FZROX holds 2,685 positions and JEPQ holds 108; 2,595 of FZROX's positions don't appear in JEPQ at all, and they are 52.1% of FZROX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares FZROX and JEPQ. Paste your whole portfolio — brokerage, 401(k), IRA — and see the overlap across every fund at once, plus what you actually own underneath them and your own Effective Funds number. Free, no account, nothing stored.
X-ray my portfolio — free →Watch FZROX vs JEPQ
We re-read both funds’ published holdings every weeknight. Leave an address and we'll tell you when what's inside actually changes.
Not sending yet — email alerts are built but switched off, and you'll be among the first when they turn on. No spam, one-click unsubscribe.
Related comparisons
Sources: issuer holdings files, FZROX as of 2026-04-30, JEPQ as of 2026-03-31. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.