PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CAOS vs. JUNT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CAOS vs. JUNT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAOS achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than JUNT's 4.22% return.


CAOS

1D
0.03%
1M
-0.01%
6M
0.27%
YTD
0.73%
1Y
1.84%
3Y*
3.59%
5Y*
10Y*

JUNT

1D
-0.59%
1M
0.97%
6M
3.43%
YTD
4.22%
1Y
10.64%
3Y*
12.77%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CAOS vs. JUNT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.73%2.55%5.33%5.23%
JUNT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF
4.22%12.42%16.03%10.45%

Correlation

The correlation between CAOS and JUNT is -0.39, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.39

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.06

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2023

-0.02

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between CAOS and JUNT has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.02 to -0.39, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CAOS vs. JUNT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 4848
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

JUNT
JUNT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
JUNT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JUNT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
JUNT Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
JUNT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
JUNT Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CAOS vs. JUNT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT). 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.


CAOSJUNTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.35

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.43

2.62

-0.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.52

13.00

-7.48

CAOS vs. JUNT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAOS Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the JUNT Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAOS and JUNT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CAOS vs. JUNT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAOS drawdown since its inception was -3.89%, smaller than the maximum JUNT drawdown of -12.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAOS and JUNT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CAOSJUNTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.89%

-12.78%

+8.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.76%

-4.08%

+3.32%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.60%

-12.78%

+9.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

-0.59%

-0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.92%

-0.98%

+0.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.33%

0.82%

-0.49%

Volatility

CAOS vs. JUNT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) is 0.49%, while AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) has a volatility of 2.83%. This indicates that CAOS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JUNT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CAOSJUNTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.49%

2.83%

-2.34%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.12%

5.45%

-4.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.56%

6.46%

-4.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.21%

9.28%

-5.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.21%

9.28%

-5.07%

CAOS vs. JUNT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAOS has a 0.63% expense ratio, which is lower than JUNT's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

CAOS vs. JUNT - Dividend Comparison

Neither CAOS nor JUNT has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CAOS and JUNT have a correlation of -0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

JUNT has higher volatility (2.83%) compared to CAOS (0.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAOS dropped -3.89% vs JUNT's -12.78%.

On 3-year performance, JUNT leads with 12.77% vs 3.59% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, JUNT has performed better with a 12.77% return vs 3.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for JUNT.

CAOS and JUNT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.63% for CAOS and 0.74% for JUNT.

JUNT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 1.18), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CAOS and JUNT

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer