JEPQ vs XLK: 38% overlap
JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF and Technology Select Sector SPDR Fund share 37.5% 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
JEPQ and XLK hold 30 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in JEPQ | in XLK | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 7.3% | 14.1% | 6.8% |
| AAPL | 6.4% | 13.2% | 6.8% |
| MSFT | 4.8% | 7.9% | 3.1% |
| AVGO | 2.2% | 5.2% | 3.0% |
| MU | 2.0% | 4.3% | 2.2% |
| LRCX | 1.8% | 2.7% | 0.9% |
| AMD | 1.7% | 4.7% | 3.0% |
| PLTR | 1.2% | 1.9% | 0.7% |
| CSCO | 1.1% | 3.0% | 1.9% |
| ADI | 1.1% | 1.3% | 0.1% |
Where JEPQ and XLK 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 | JEPQ | XLK | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Information Technology | 37.9% | 99.9% | −62.0pp |
| Unclassified | 22.3% | 0.0% | +22.3pp |
| Communication Services | 12.0% | 0.0% | +12.0pp |
| Consumer Discretionary | 10.0% | 0.0% | +10.0pp |
| Consumer Staples | 6.3% | 0.0% | +6.3pp |
| Health Care | 4.2% | 0.0% | +4.2pp |
| Cash and/or Derivatives | 1.8% | 0.1% | +1.8pp |
| Industrials | 1.7% | 0.0% | +1.7pp |
Δ is JEPQ minus XLK, 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
58.8% of JEPQ by weight, held in no part of XLK.
19.2% of XLK by weight, held in no part of JEPQ.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| JEPQ | XLK | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 40.0% | 61.3% |
| Positions held | 108 | 76 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $35 | $8 |
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 JEPQ and XLK overlap?
JEPQ and XLK overlap 37.5% by portfolio weight — moderate overlap. They share 30 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (JEPQ as of 2026-03-31, XLK as of 2026-07-23).
How is the overlap between JEPQ and XLK calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If JEPQ holds a stock at 6% and XLK 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 JEPQ and XLK?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 37.5% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does JEPQ own that XLK doesn't?
JEPQ holds 108 positions and XLK holds 76; 78 of JEPQ's positions don't appear in XLK at all, and they are 58.8% of JEPQ by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares JEPQ and XLK. 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 JEPQ vs XLK
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, JEPQ as of 2026-03-31, XLK as of 2026-07-23. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.