ACEP vs. FJUN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ACEP (ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF) and FJUN (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ACEP is actively managed, while FJUN is passively managed. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACEP charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FJUN.

Performance

ACEP vs. FJUN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF (ACEP) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACEP achieves a 21.62% return, which is significantly higher than FJUN's 4.00% return.

ACEP

• 1D: -1.50%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 21.62%
• 6M: 20.24%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FJUN

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: 4.00%
• 6M: 3.80%
• 1Y: 12.54%
• 3Y*: 13.29%
• 5Y*: 10.54%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ACEP vs. FJUN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ACEP ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF	21.62%	8.00%
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	4.00%	3.04%

Correlation

The correlation between ACEP and FJUN is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025	0.70

ACEP vs. FJUN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ACEP	FJUN
Technology	34.9%	39.0%
Financial Services	14.2%	11.1%
Basic Materials	12.5%	1.7%
Energy	12.2%	3.1%
Industrials	10.7%	7.8%
Healthcare	7.2%	8.3%
Consumer Cyclical	2.9%	9.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	4.5%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.8%
Communication Services	1.2%	10.6%
Utilities	-	2.1%

Return for Risk

ACEP vs. FJUN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ACEP

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

FJUN

FJUN Risk / Return Rank: 80
FJUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
FJUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FJUN Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FJUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FJUN Martin Ratio Rank: 88

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ACEP vs. FJUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF (ACEP) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN). 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.

	ACEP	FJUN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.23	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.38	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.48	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	3.05	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	17.51	—

Drawdowns

ACEP vs. FJUN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACEP drawdown since its inception was -7.06%, smaller than the maximum FJUN drawdown of -13.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACEP and FJUN.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACEP	FJUN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.06%	-13.26%	+6.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.13%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.26%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.87%	-0.97%	-1.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.49%	-1.66%	+0.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.72%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ACEP	FJUN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.94%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	4.40%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.81%	5.66%	+12.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.81%	10.56%	+7.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.81%	10.25%	+7.56%

ACEP vs. FJUN - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACEP has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than FJUN's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACEP vs. FJUN - Dividend Comparison

ACEP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.11%, while FJUN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
ACEP ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF	0.11%	0.14%
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACEP and FJUN in my portfolio?

ACEP and FJUN have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ACEP or FJUN?

On fees, ACEP is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACEP or FJUN?

ACEP is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJUN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACEP or FJUN?

ACEP has the higher dividend yield at 0.11%, compared with 0.00% for FJUN.

What is the main difference between ACEP and FJUN?

They also come from different issuers: ARS Investment Partners and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for ACEP and 0.85% for FJUN.