DMAY vs. JULB

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

DMAY (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - May) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. DMAY is passively managed, while JULB is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DMAY charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

DMAY vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - May (DMAY) 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, DMAY achieves a 4.38% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 7.89% return.

DMAY

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 0.72%
• 6M: 3.83%
• YTD: 4.38%
• 1Y: 9.79%
• 3Y*: 11.02%
• 5Y*: 6.88%
• 10Y*: —

JULB

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 1.63%
• 6M: 6.76%
• YTD: 7.89%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DMAY vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DMAY FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - May	4.38%	2.16%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	7.89%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between DMAY and JULB is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.91

Return for Risk

DMAY vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

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

DMAY

DMAY Risk / Return Rank: 80
DMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
DMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
DMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 85
DMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
DMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

DMAY vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - May (DMAY) 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.

	DMAY	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.95	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.47	—	—

Drawdowns

DMAY vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMAY drawdown since its inception was -13.90%, which is greater than JULB's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMAY and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	DMAY	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.90%	-5.24%	-8.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.36%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.38%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.22%	-0.79%	-1.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.64%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DMAY	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.32%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.56%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.26%	6.74%	-1.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.09%	6.74%	+2.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.42%	6.74%	+1.68%

DMAY vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

DMAY vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither DMAY nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DMAY and JULB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, DMAY and JULB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, DMAY 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, DMAY or JULB?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between DMAY and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DMAY and 0.25% for JULB.