ITOT vs JEPQ: 44% overlap
iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF and JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF share 44.3% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published about 4 months apart — JEPQ as of 2026-03-31, the rest through 2026-07-23. 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 1.6. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
ITOT and JEPQ hold 84 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in ITOT | in JEPQ | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 7.0% | 7.3% | 0.3% |
| AAPL | 6.6% | 6.4% | 0.2% |
| MSFT | 3.9% | 4.8% | 0.9% |
| AMZN | 3.2% | 4.0% | 0.8% |
| AVGO | 2.6% | 2.2% | 0.4% |
| GOOG | 2.1% | 5.1% | 3.0% |
| META | 1.8% | 3.0% | 1.2% |
| MU | 1.6% | 2.0% | 0.5% |
| TSLA | 1.2% | 2.6% | 1.3% |
| AMD | 1.2% | 1.7% | 0.5% |
Where ITOT 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 | ITOT | JEPQ | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified | 0.0% | 22.3% | −22.3pp |
| Financials | 12.7% | 0.5% | +12.1pp |
| Industrials | 10.1% | 1.7% | +8.4pp |
| Health Care | 9.7% | 4.2% | +5.5pp |
| Communication Services | 8.7% | 12.0% | −3.3pp |
| Energy | 3.5% | 0.4% | +3.2pp |
| Information Technology | 35.2% | 37.9% | −2.8pp |
| Real Estate | 2.3% | 0.2% | +2.1pp |
Δ is ITOT 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
53.2% of ITOT by weight, held in no part of JEPQ.
22.4% of JEPQ by weight, held in no part of ITOT.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| ITOT | JEPQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 32.7% | 40.0% |
| Positions held | 2,440 | 108 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $3 | $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 ITOT and JEPQ overlap?
ITOT and JEPQ overlap 44.3% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 84 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (ITOT as of 2026-07-23, JEPQ as of 2026-03-31).
How is the overlap between ITOT and JEPQ calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If ITOT 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 ITOT and JEPQ?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 44.3% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does ITOT own that JEPQ doesn't?
ITOT holds 2,440 positions and JEPQ holds 108; 2,355 of ITOT's positions don't appear in JEPQ at all, and they are 53.2% of ITOT by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares ITOT 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 ITOT 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, ITOT as of 2026-07-23, JEPQ as of 2026-03-31. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.