PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBT vs. JULT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBT vs. JULT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a 6.90% return, which is significantly higher than JULT's 6.16% return.


FEBT

1D
-0.60%
1M
-0.24%
YTD
6.90%
6M
6.53%
1Y
18.40%
3Y*
15.49%
5Y*
10Y*

JULT

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.67%
YTD
6.16%
6M
5.91%
1Y
17.45%
3Y*
15.57%
5Y*
11.36%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBT vs. JULT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FEBT
Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF
6.90%12.72%17.29%15.47%
JULT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF
6.16%13.73%17.43%15.83%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and JULT is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.96

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

0.95

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

0.95

The correlation between FEBT and JULT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FEBT vs. JULT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT
FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

JULT
JULT Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
JULT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULT Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
JULT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULT Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
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.

FEBT vs. JULT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT). 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.


FEBTJULTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.33

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.52

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.06

3.36

-0.30

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.28

18.17

-2.89

FEBT vs. JULT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is comparable to the JULT Sharpe Ratio of 2.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and JULT, 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

FEBT vs. JULT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, roughly equal to the maximum JULT drawdown of -13.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and JULT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBTJULTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.19%

-13.57%

+0.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.04%

-5.22%

-0.82%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.19%

-13.57%

+0.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.26%

-0.11%

-1.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.17%

-1.76%

+0.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.21%

0.96%

+0.25%

Volatility

FEBT vs. JULT - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a higher volatility of 2.39% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) at 0.97%. This indicates that FEBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JULT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBTJULTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.39%

0.97%

+1.42%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.28%

5.22%

+1.06%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.84%

6.98%

+0.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.76%

11.02%

-1.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.76%

10.45%

-0.69%

FEBT vs. JULT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FEBT and JULT have an expense ratio of 0.74%.


Dividends

FEBT vs. JULT - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor JULT has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
FEBT
Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF
0.00%0.00%0.28%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
JULT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%3.86%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, FEBT and JULT 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.

FEBT has higher volatility (2.39%) compared to JULT (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs JULT's -13.57%.

On 3-year performance, JULT leads with 15.57% vs 15.49% for FEBT. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, JULT has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, JULT has performed better with a 15.57% return vs 15.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBT and JULT have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

FEBT and JULT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

JULT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.54 vs 2.37), 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 FEBT and JULT

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