EQL vs. FJUN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) and FJUN (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - EQL tracks the NYSE Equal Sector Weight Index while FJUN tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index June. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, EQL returned 10.58%/yr vs 10.54%/yr for FJUN. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EQL charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FJUN.

Performance

EQL vs. FJUN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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, EQL achieves a 8.44% return, which is significantly higher than FJUN's 4.00% return.

EQL

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: -0.97%
• YTD: 8.44%
• 6M: 7.90%
• 1Y: 17.48%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 10.58%
• 10Y*: 12.66%

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)

EQL vs. FJUN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	8.44%	13.09%	16.44%	16.87%	-10.72%	29.32%	18.95%
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	4.00%	11.05%	16.38%	22.30%	-4.95%	11.47%	9.90%

Correlation

The correlation between EQL and FJUN is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2020	0.87

The correlation between EQL and FJUN shifts across timeframes, from 0.71 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

EQL vs. FJUN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EQL	FJUN
Technology	12.3%	39.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	9.9%
Real Estate	9.2%	1.8%
Communication Services	8.8%	10.6%
Healthcare	8.7%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	8.6%	4.5%
Financial Services	8.6%	11.1%
Industrials	8.5%	7.8%
Utilities	8.4%	2.1%
Energy	8.0%	3.1%
Basic Materials	8.0%	1.7%

Return for Risk

EQL vs. FJUN — Risk / Return Rank

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

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 58
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 54
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

EQL vs. FJUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) 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.

	EQL	FJUN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	2.23	-0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	3.38	-0.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.48	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	3.05	-0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.95	17.51	-6.56

EQL vs. FJUN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EQL Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the FJUN Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EQL and FJUN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EQL vs. FJUN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EQL drawdown since its inception was -35.65%, which is greater than FJUN's maximum drawdown of -13.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQL and FJUN.

Drawdown Indicators

	EQL	FJUN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.65%	-13.26%	-22.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-4.13%	-2.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.07%	-13.26%	-1.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.24%	-13.26%	-5.98%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.65%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.76%	-0.97%	-0.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.25%	-1.66%	-1.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.60%	0.72%	+0.88%

Volatility

EQL vs. FJUN - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) has a higher volatility of 3.08% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN) at 0.94%. This indicates that EQL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FJUN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EQL	FJUN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.08%	0.94%	+2.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.20%	4.40%	+2.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.59%	5.66%	+3.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.56%	10.56%	+4.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.54%	10.25%	+6.29%

EQL vs. FJUN - Expense Ratio Comparison

EQL has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than FJUN's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

EQL vs. FJUN - Dividend Comparison

EQL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, while FJUN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.63%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EQL and FJUN in my portfolio?

EQL and FJUN have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EQL or FJUN?

EQL has higher volatility (3.08%) compared to FJUN (0.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQL dropped -35.65% vs FJUN's -13.26%.

Which ETF is better, EQL or FJUN?

On 5-year performance, EQL leads with 10.58% vs 10.54% for FJUN. On fees, EQL is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, FJUN has been the lower-risk option at 0.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EQL or FJUN?

Over the 5-year period, EQL has performed better with a 10.58% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EQL or FJUN?

EQL is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJUN.

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

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.00% for FJUN.

What is the main difference between EQL and FJUN?

EQL tracks NYSE Equal Sector Weight Index, while FJUN tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index June. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for EQL and 0.85% for FJUN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FJUN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.84), 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.