DAPR vs. JULB

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DAPR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. DAPR is passively managed, while JULB is actively managed. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DAPR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

DAPR vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April (DAPR) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DAPR achieves a 3.22% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 6.38% return.

DAPR

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: 3.22%
• 6M: 3.29%
• 1Y: 8.85%
• 3Y*: 10.16%
• 5Y*: 5.89%
• 10Y*: —

JULB

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 0.61%
• YTD: 6.38%
• 6M: 6.05%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DAPR vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DAPR FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April	3.22%	1.83%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	6.38%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between DAPR and JULB is 0.78, 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 Oct 14, 2025	0.78

Return for Risk

DAPR vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

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

DAPR

DAPR Risk / Return Rank: 93
DAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
DAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
DAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
DAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
DAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

JULB

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

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.

DAPR vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April (DAPR) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). 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.

	DAPR	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.78	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.19	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.61	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.08	—	—

Drawdowns

DAPR vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DAPR drawdown since its inception was -10.51%, which is greater than JULB's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DAPR and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	DAPR	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.51%	-5.24%	-5.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.59%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.51%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.91%	-0.43%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.28%	-0.83%	-1.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.25%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DAPR	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.85%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.58%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.20%	6.84%	-3.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.23%	6.84%	+1.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.15%	6.84%	+1.31%

DAPR vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

DAPR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

DAPR vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither DAPR nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DAPR and JULB in my portfolio?

DAPR and JULB have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DAPR or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DAPR or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DAPR or JULB?

DAPR and JULB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DAPR and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DAPR and 0.25% for JULB.