Jpmorgan Global Select Equity ETF JGLO

JPMorgan Global Select is a compelling option in the large-cap blend Morningstar Category and merits High People and Process ratings.

The strategy is led by Helge Skibeli, a J.P. Morgan veteran of nearly four decades, supported by comanager Christian Pecher. Skibeli has held senior research leadership roles across Asian, US, and global equities, making fundamental research the backbone of his career. His long tenure and proven ability to integrate research insights are key strengths here.

Crucially, the portfolio managers are underpinned by J.P. Morgan’s deep fundamental analyst resource, one of the industry’s deepest and most experienced teams. Around 80 research analysts each cover 20–35 companies, on average, bringing 21 years of industry experience. This analyst network is central to the strategy’s stock-picking edge.

The strategy employs a disciplined, bottom-up stock-picking process supported by this extensive global research platform. Analysts covering 2,500-plus companies classify stocks as premium, quality, standard, or challenged and assign five-year expected return targets to guide portfolio construction.

The managers focus on premium and quality names, maintaining a valuation-conscious, conviction-driven approach in a portfolio of 65-95 holdings, with modest flexibility at the country or sector level and typically high turnover (50%–100%). The portfolio favors financially healthy large- and mega-cap companies, with minimal small-cap exposure.

Under Skibeli’s management from December 2015 through Feb. 28, 2026, the strategy has delivered strong results. The C ACC Clean share class has returned an annualized 12.8%, outpacing both the global large-cap blend equity category average (9.3%) and the MSCI World Index (12.3% in USD). Returns have exhibited somewhat higher volatility, but this has generally been rewarded with superior risk-adjusted outcomes versus peers.

The year 2025 was a challenging one in relative terms, driven by weak stock selection. Notably, underweight positions in strong performers such as Alphabet and Broadcom detracted meaningfully, as did headwinds within the healthcare basket, particularly from Novo Nordisk and UnitedHealth.

JPMorgan Global Select employs a disciplined and repeatable process that makes strong use of the firm’s extensive analytical resources. This codified approach, supported by one of the industry’s largest global research platforms, earns the strategy a High Process rating.

The investment philosophy centers on rigorous bottom-up stock selection, with limited emphasis on top-down style or factor positioning. J.P. Morgan’s regional analyst teams, covering more than 2,500 companies globally, form the foundation of the idea-generation process. Analysts conduct in-depth fundamental research to classify stocks within the firm’s proprietary framework as premium, quality, standard, or challenged.

Companies categorized as premium and quality typically operate in structurally attractive industries, exhibit durable competitive advantages, maintain strong balance sheets, and generate consistent cash flow. Conversely, standard and challenged companies are viewed as having weaker fundamentals and less reliable prospects.

Analysts assign a five-year expected return target to each company, incorporating near-term earnings, normalized earnings power, and long-term growth assumptions. These targets are ranked on relative attractiveness, which provides a clear and structured input into portfolio construction. The managers focus predominantly on premium and quality stocks but remain disciplined around valuation to avoid overpaying. This valuation-conscious approach helps keep the portfolio anchored in the core portion of the style spectrum.

This strategy shares many traits with its more concentrated sibling, JPMorgan Global Focus, but there are some marginal differences.

Portfolio construction is conviction-driven across 65-95 holdings with a maximum active weighting of 3% per stock. The managers also retain the flexibility to deviate up to plus or minus 5% at an industry level and plus or minus 10% at a regional level. In practice, these tilts are modest, ensuring stock-specific factors remain the dominant driver of returns.

As of February 2025, the portfolio’s industry positioning was generally modest, with the exception of retail, which reached the upper end of its range at a 5% active overweighting. At the regional level, the team continues to maintain a meaningful overweighting to emerging markets (4.7% overweighting), driven largely by the position in Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. The US remains the dominant allocation, accounting for more than 72% of the portfolio (2.1% overweighting), while Europe and Asia remain modest underweightings.

Turnover is generally high, typically between 50% and 100%, reflecting the team’s willingness to reallocate capital as valuation signals evolve. While this creates a more actively managed profile, portfolio oversight is robust. Quarterly review meetings with J.P. Morgan’s investment directors provide challenge and accountability on performance, risk, and adherence to process.

Morningstar’s risk model highlights the strategy’s consistent emphasis on financially healthy businesses with economic moats. There is also a preference for large- and mega-cap companies. Exposure to small caps is minimal, consistent with the philosophy of focusing on globally dominant franchises.

This strategy continues to warrant a High People Pillar rating, reflecting the strength and depth of its leadership team alongside the excellent resources of J.P. Morgan’s International equity platform.

Helge Skibeli has led the strategy since December 2015 and remains the final decision-maker. A J.P. Morgan veteran of nearly four decades, Skibeli has held senior research leadership roles across Asian, US, and global equities, making fundamental research the backbone of his career. From 2002 to 2015, he ran the US Analyst Large Cap portfolio before becoming manager of JPMorgan Global Select. His long tenure and proven ability to integrate research insights are key strengths here.

He is supported by long-term colleague Christian Pecher, who become comanager in 2019. Pecher is a J.P. Morgan lifer and has 27 years of experience. His background includes research coverage of European utilities and technology, as well as a leadership role in Tokyo as head of developed Asia research, where he oversaw the Japanese analyst portfolio.

The duo shares a collaborative, research-driven approach, with an emphasis on teamwork, learning from mistakes, and continual improvement. The team's workload is manageable. While Skibeli also manages JPMorgan Global Focus, including its closed-end equivalent, JGGI, and JPMorgan Global Dividend, they employ similar strategies with minor differences.

Crucially, the portfolio managers are underpinned by J.P. Morgan’s deep fundamental analyst resource, one of the industry’s deepest and most experienced teams. Around 80 research analysts each cover 20–35 companies, on average, bringing 21 years of industry experience. They are supported by research associates, which both extend capacity and create a pipeline for future talent. This analyst network is central to the strategy’s stock-picking edge.

J.P. Morgan continues to build a track record of strong stewardship, supporting a Parent rating upgrade to High from Above Average.

With more than USD 4 trillion in assets under management (including USD 1.3 trillion in money market funds) and a broad reach, J.P. Morgan is among the largest active asset managers in the US, Europe, and Asia. Although some multi-asset offerings have struggled over the past five years, prompting new leadership to make changes to investment teams, its equity and fixed-income teams boast long-tenured portfolio managers who practice repeatable investment processes that have generally produced strong long-term results. Most of its funds are core building blocks with long lifetimes, though its lineup around the world also includes more-specialized options: Two options-based equity-income exchange-traded funds, launched in 2020 and 2022, are now among the firm’s largest. J.P. Morgan has been an early mover in offering active ETFs, having converted 12 of its open-end mutual funds to the structure and launching others. It isn’t always at the forefront of emerging trends. While it has filed registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission for an interval fund and an ETF investing in private markets, it hasn’t yet introduced such an option for all investors, whether on its own or in partnership with another asset manager, unlike some of its closest competitors.

To support the firm’s diverse investment offerings, J.P. Morgan has invested heavily in both portfolio management tools and its client organization. Over the past 10 years, the firm has developed robust proprietary technology with advanced analytics and broad buy-in from investment analysts, portfolio traders, and portfolio managers, all of whom have easy access to the platform. The firm also stands apart for its demonstrated commitment to clients. In the early 2000s, J.P. Morgan began pivoting its engagement with financial advisors to adopt a more consultative approach, supported by its sought-after Guide to the Markets research series that focuses on investor education, not product pitches. This perspective can help clients stay the course, supporting positive investor outcomes.

Incentives reinforce alignment with fundholders. Beginning more than 10 years ago, investment team compensation is tied to three-, five-, and 10-year performance, and portfolio managers must invest at least half of their deferred compensation in J.P. Morgan strategies. Many firms encourage portfolio managers to invest alongside fundholders, but J.P. Morgan goes a step further in requiring client-facing individuals to invest substantial portions of their incentive compensation in the funds.

Although some funds still face high cost hurdles, more than half of share classes charge competitive fees relative to peers.

Under Helge Skibeli’s management since December 2015, the strategy has delivered strong results. The C ACC Clean share class has returned an annualized 12.8% through February 2026, outpacing both the global large-blend equity category average (9.3%) and the MSCI World Index (12.3%, in USD). Returns have exhibited somewhat higher volatility, but this has generally been rewarded with superior risk-adjusted outcomes versus peers.

Stock selection has been the key driver of outperformance, and we would expect this core approach to outperform over a full market cycle. The emphasis on high-quality, durable businesses has provided some resilience during market stress, notably in 2022 when the fund declined 14.8% versus losses of 19.5% for peers and 18.1% for the index. Healthcare was a relatively bright spot that year, with overweight positions in AbbVie, Bristol-Myers, and Boston Scientific adding value.

The strategy rebounded sharply in 2023, gaining 27.4% and ranking in the fifth percentile of the category. Outperformance was primarily driven by technology names, including Microsoft and Uber, as well as overweight positions in Amazon.com and Meta Platforms.

Performance remained strong in 2024, with a 16.2% gain that exceeded the category average by 3.9%, though it lagged the MSCI World Index’s 18.7% return. Technology again was the largest contributor, with positions in Nvidia, TSMC, and Apple boosting results.

2025 was a challenging year in relative terms. The C ACC share class returned 13.2%, lagging both the category and the benchmark by 6.7% and 7.9%, respectively. The primary drag on relative performance was negative stock selection. Notably, underweight positions in strong performers such as Alphabet and Broadcom detracted meaningfully, as did headwinds within the healthcare basket, particularly from Novo Nordisk and UnitedHealth.

JPMorgan Global Select Equity ETF's Prospectus Adjusted Expense Ratio is 0.47% per year. It places it in the cheapest quintile of the Morningstar US Fund Global Large-Stock Blend Category, where the median fee is 0.88% per year. This cost positioning translates into a Medalist Rating Price Score of 1.72, which reflects its relative price positioning within the category. The Price Score ranges from -2.50 (most expensive) to +2.50 (cheapest), with higher scores indicating better cost competitiveness.