GET DAILY SIGNALSJOET vs MTUM: Quality Momentum Blend Compared to Pure Momentum Exposure
Key Takeaways
- Different momentum approaches: JOET blends equal-weighted quality and momentum factors across ~125 large-cap U.S. stocks, while MTUM is a market-cap-weighted, pure momentum strategy targeting large- and mid-cap names with strong 6- and 12-month price trends.
- Contrasting concentration: JOET keeps any single holding near 1%, spreading risk broadly; MTUM concentrates roughly 35–40% of assets in its top 10 positions, creating higher single-name sensitivity.
- Cost gap: MTUM charges a 0.15% expense ratio versus JOET's 0.29%, giving the iShares fund a clear cost-efficiency edge.
- Scale and liquidity: MTUM holds tens of billions in assets and trades with much deeper liquidity, while JOET is a smaller, comparatively thinner fund.
- Sector tilt: MTUM is heavily weighted to technology (~47–50%), whereas JOET distributes weight more evenly across technology, industrials, financials, healthcare, and energy.
- Tickeron AI Verdict: On balance, Tickeron's AI would favor MTUM for its lower cost, deeper liquidity, longer track record, and purer momentum factor exposure.
Introduction
Both the Virtus Terranova U.S. Quality Momentum ETF (JOET) and the iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) target the same investor goal: capturing the "momentum" anomaly, the tendency of recently strong stocks to keep outperforming. Yet they are not direct clones. JOET pairs momentum with a quality screen and an equal-weight design, producing a diversified, factor-blended portfolio. MTUM pursues a purer, more concentrated momentum exposure weighted by market capitalization. This ETF comparison matters because the two funds offer meaningfully different risk profiles, sector exposures, and costs even as they chase a similar return driver, making the choice between them a question of relative positioning rather than simple substitution. I also checked this using Tickeron’s AI Screener to see how the two line up against broader industry benchmarks.
JOET: A Quality-Momentum Approach
JOET tracks the Terranova U.S. Quality Momentum Index, a passively implemented, rules-based benchmark that selects and equally weights U.S. large-cap companies exhibiting both quality fundamentals and positive technical momentum. The fund holds roughly 125 stocks, and because it is equal-weighted, no single position dominates: top holdings typically hover near 1% of assets and have recently included names such as MRVL, MU, AMD, OKTA, and GLW.
By sector, JOET is relatively balanced, with technology (roughly 27–28%) the largest sleeve, followed by industrials, financials, healthcare, and energy. This diversification reduces the influence of any single stock or industry. The fund carries an expense ratio of 0.29% and launched in November 2020, giving it a shorter operating history than its larger peer. Its quality-plus-momentum tilt and equal-weight rebalancing distinguish it from a conventional capitalization-weighted momentum product. From what I see in the data, that structure can help smooth out some of the volatility that comes with narrower bets.
MTUM: Pure Momentum with Concentration
MTUM tracks the MSCI USA Momentum Index, which selects and weights U.S. large- and mid-cap stocks based primarily on 6- and 12-month price appreciation, with a low-volatility overlay applied over the trailing three years. The fund holds approximately 125–130 names but concentrates far more than JOET, with the top 10 positions accounting for roughly 35–40% of assets. Recent top holdings have included NVDA, AVGO, MU, AMD, INTC, JNJ, and XOM.
Technology dominates MTUM at roughly 47–50% of the portfolio, with healthcare, energy, and industrials each contributing around 10%. The fund charges a 0.15% expense ratio, rebalances semi-annually, and has traded since 2013, giving it a much longer track record and significantly deeper liquidity than JOET.
Industry and Thematic Backdrop
Both funds are heavily influenced by the behavior of large-cap U.S. growth and technology leadership, which has been the dominant driver of recent market cycles. Persistent themes such as artificial intelligence investment, semiconductor demand, and enterprise software spending have concentrated momentum in a relatively narrow set of mega-cap technology names. That environment favors a pure momentum strategy like MTUM, which leans aggressively into those winners, while JOET's equal-weight and quality discipline spreads exposure into financials, energy, and industrials. I’m watching this closely because shifts in AI spending or rate expectations could quickly change the relative performance between the two.
Performance and Positioning Comparison
In recent weeks and months, relative fund performance has largely tracked the technology and growth complex. MTUM's concentrated momentum weighting has generally responded more sharply to tech-led rallies, while JOET's equal-weight, multi-sector design has tended to produce more measured moves in either direction. When leadership broadens into financials, energy, or industrials, JOET's diversification can narrow the gap, whereas MTUM's technology bias can lag if those areas stall.
Volatility profiles also differ. MTUM's top-heavy structure and higher valuation multiples generally imply greater short-term swings, while JOET's lower single-stock concentration offers a comparatively smoother ride. Cost and liquidity further separate them: MTUM's 0.15% fee and deep trading volume support efficient implementation, while JOET's 0.29% fee and smaller asset base impose a modest structural disadvantage. Neither fund is leveraged or inverse; both are passively managed, transparent equity strategies.
Exploring Tickeron’s AI Tools
I frequently use Tickeron’s AI Screener when comparing ETFs like these. It lets me apply technical patterns, fundamentals, and AI-driven signals across thousands of securities to quickly surface how different momentum approaches stack up. The tool has helped me identify sector tilts and concentration differences more efficiently than manual review alone, and I find the customizable filters particularly useful for refining my own watchlist before making allocation decisions.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
MTUM in downward trend: price dove below 50-day moving average on October 14, 2026
MTUM moved below its 50-day moving average on October 14, 2026 date and that indicates a change from an upward trend to a downward trend. In 30 of 33 similar past instances, the stock price decreased further within the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 90%.
Technical Analysis (Indicators)
Bearish Trend Analysis
The Momentum Indicator moved below the 0 level on October 12, 2026. You may want to consider selling the stock, shorting the stock, or exploring put options on MTUM as a result. In 77 of 89 cases where the Momentum Indicator fell below 0, the stock fell further within the subsequent month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 87%.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence Histogram (MACD) for MTUM turned negative on October 12, 2026. This could be a sign that the stock is set to turn lower in the coming weeks. Traders may want to sell the stock or buy put options. Tickeron's A.I.dvisor looked at 52 similar instances when the indicator turned negative. In 41 of the 52 cases the stock turned lower in the days that followed. This puts the odds of success at 79%.
The 10-day moving average for MTUM crossed bearishly below the 50-day moving average on October 20, 2026. This indicates that the trend has shifted lower and could be considered a sell signal. In 13 of 14 past instances when the 10-day crossed below the 50-day, the stock continued to move higher over the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 90%.
Following a 3-day decline, the stock is projected to fall further. Considering past instances where MTUM declined for three days, the price rose further in 50 of 62 cases within the following month. The odds of a continued downward trend are 79%.
The Aroon Indicator for MTUM entered a downward trend on November 10, 2026. This could indicate a strong downward move is ahead for the stock. Traders may want to consider selling the stock or buying put options.
Bullish Trend Analysis
The RSI Oscillator points to a transition from a downward trend to an upward trend -- in cases where MTUM's RSI Oscillator exited the oversold zone, 26 of 27 resulted in an increase in price. Tickeron's analysis proposes that the odds of a continued upward trend are 90%.
The Stochastic Oscillator shows that the ticker has stayed in the oversold zone for 6 days. The price of this ticker is presumed to bounce back soon, since the longer the ticker stays in the oversold zone, the more promptly an upward trend is expected.
Following a +6.82% 3-day Advance, the price is estimated to grow further. Considering data from situations where MTUM advanced for three days, in 290 of 356 cases, the price rose further within the following month. The odds of a continued upward trend are 81%.
MTUM may jump back above the lower band and head toward the middle band. Traders may consider buying the stock or exploring call options.
Notable companies
Industry description
Market Cap
High and low price notable news
Volume
Fundamental Analysis Ratings
The average fundamental analysis ratings, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, are as follows
Advertisement
Advertisement