PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JPUS vs. GXLC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JPUS vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF (JPUS) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JPUS achieves a 16.20% return, which is significantly higher than GXLC's 11.54% return.


JPUS

1D
0.53%
1M
1.30%
6M
11.04%
YTD
16.20%
1Y
23.92%
3Y*
15.47%
5Y*
10.18%
10Y*
11.51%
ALL TIME*
12.18%

GXLC

1D
1.34%
1M
1.54%
6M
9.67%
YTD
11.54%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$25.69K$21.89K$18.29K
$730.62K$1.08M$1.02M

JPUS vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
JPUS
JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF
16.20%1.37%
GXLC
Global X U.S. 500 ETF
11.54%3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between JPUS and GXLC is 0.57, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025

0.57

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

JPUS vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

JPUS
JPUS Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
JPUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JPUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
JPUS Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
JPUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
JPUS Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

GXLC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

JPUS vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF (JPUS) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


JPUSGXLCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.32

JPUS vs. GXLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

JPUS vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JPUS drawdown since its inception was -38.69%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JPUS and GXLC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JPUSGXLCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.69%

-9.08%

-29.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.96%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.04%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.62%

-0.16%

-0.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.77%

-1.57%

-2.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.67%

Volatility

JPUS vs. GXLC - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JPUSGXLCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.30%

13.64%

-3.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.45%

13.64%

+0.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.72%

13.64%

+3.08%

JPUS vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

JPUS has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

JPUS vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison

JPUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, more than GXLC's 0.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GXLC
Global X U.S. 500 ETF
0.63%0.30%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
JPUS
JPMorgan Diversified Return US Equity ETF
1.96%2.27%2.12%2.26%2.35%1.67%1.94%2.09%2.16%1.25%0.77%0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


JPUS and GXLC have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for JPUS.

JPUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.63% for GXLC.

JPUS tracks JPMorgan Diversified Factor US Equity Index, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for JPUS and 0.02% for GXLC.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JPUS and GXLC

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer