Curated comparison
Compare three active monthly income funds with materially different equity universes and option overlays.
Dataset 97e56f011b2e · imported Sep 7, 2026 · issuer evidence checked 2026-09-08
| Fund | Yield | AUM | Expense | Cumulative return | Payout | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JEPILower-volatility equity income | 8.00% | $46.3B | 0.35% | +96.0% | Monthly | Source-reported |
| JEPQNasdaq equity income | 12.90% | $41.8B | 0.35% | +90.0% | Monthly | Source-reported |
| DIVOSelective covered-call income | 4.80% | $7.9B | 0.56% | +227.0% | Monthly | Source-reported |
Yield, AUM, and cumulative return are source-reported and may use different as-of dates. Fees, inception, strategy, and payout cadence are checked against official issuer material. A distribution rate is not a total-return forecast.
Decision framework
JEPI emphasizes a smoother large-cap profile, JEPQ accepts more Nasdaq concentration, and DIVO uses a smaller stock portfolio with selective call writing.
JEPI is not a substitute for the S&P 500: the options-linked sleeve reshapes both income and upside. Judge it on total return, tax character, downside behavior, and distribution variability—not yield in isolation.
Key risk: Equity-linked notes add counterparty and structural complexity, while option income can cap participation in fast-rising markets.
JEPQ starts from a more growth-sensitive opportunity set than JEPI. That can support higher option premiums and upside, but it also raises concentration and valuation risk.
Key risk: Technology concentration, equity-linked-note exposure, and capped upside can combine poorly during sharp market reversals.
DIVO differs from index buy-write funds because it owns a compact stock portfolio and writes calls tactically on selected positions. That preserves more upside flexibility, while adding manager-selection risk and a higher fee.
Key risk: A concentrated portfolio and discretionary options decisions make outcomes depend heavily on the manager’s stock and strike selection.
Method and limitation
The conclusion compares visible portfolio roles, costs, payout cadence, source-reported metrics, and stated strategy risks. It is educational, does not rank funds for every investor, and does not account for your taxes, time horizon, or portfolio.