BlackRock’s newer Nasdaq-income ETF quietly outperforms JEPQ, despite the same fee, according to a market report

BlackRock’s exchange-traded fund strategy aimed at generating Nasdaq income is drawing fresh attention after a market report highlighted relative performance versus JEPQ, the best-known Nasdaq covered-call income ETF from JPMorgan. In the Aug. 27 article, the claim is straightforward: the newer BlackRock “version” is up 19% for the year, while JEPQ is up 10%.

The comparison is framed around two elements that matter to income-focused ETF investors, yield-seeking returns and ongoing cost. The report asserts that the BlackRock-linked product is “at the exact same fee” as JEPQ, implying that investors can look at performance without having to fully discount the result for different expense levels, at least as described in the article.

JEPQ itself is positioned in the market report as the “most popular Nasdaq income fund of the past four years.” JEPQ’s brand recognition is part of why the article argues that many investors holding the original fund may not be aware a newer alternative exists, even if it is designed for a broadly similar role in a portfolio.

Beyond the headline performance gap, the article’s thrust is about discoverability and investor behavior. It suggests a misalignment between what is widely owned and what may be doing better in the period cited. Put simply, the piece contends that popularity can lag behind relative results, especially when a newer product is less prominent in mainstream trading channels.

From a sector perspective, the story fits into a broader pattern in exchange-traded funds, where issuers compete to package similar income and “covered call” exposures with different management approaches, trading mechanics, and levels of marketing attention. In these comparisons, investor takeaways typically turn on how closely the strategies track comparable indices or volatility regimes, and how much of the return comes from income distributions versus price movement. The article, however, is focused on performance and fee parity rather than those mechanics.

A key caveat is that the market post does not, in the material provided here, specify the exact ticker symbol for the newer BlackRock Nasdaq-income ETF or detail its specific holdings and covered-call rules. It also does not provide distribution details, drawdown behavior, or methodology for the quoted “up” figures. Without those details, readers should treat the 19% vs. 10% comparison as a high-level relative snapshot from the reporting outlet rather than a full apples-to-apples analysis.