FEBT vs. JULW

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW).

FEBT and JULW are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FEBT is an actively managed fund by Allianz. It was launched on Feb 1, 2023. JULW is an actively managed fund by Allianz. It was launched on Jun 30, 2020.

Performance

FEBT vs. JULW - 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 Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FEBT vs. JULW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	-1.69%	12.72%	17.29%	14.73%
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	-0.79%	11.57%	12.39%	11.67%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a -1.69% return, which is significantly lower than JULW's -0.79% return.

FEBT

• 1D: 2.03%
• 1M: -3.34%
• YTD: -1.69%
• 6M: 1.12%
• 1Y: 14.62%
• 3Y*: 14.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULW

• 1D: 1.28%
• 1M: -1.59%
• YTD: -0.79%
• 6M: 1.06%
• 1Y: 12.61%
• 3Y*: 11.33%
• 5Y*: 8.05%
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBT vs. JULW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

FEBT

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF

JULW

AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. JULW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 70
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 74
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 79

JULW

JULW Risk / Return Rank: 83
JULW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
JULW Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
JULW Omega Ratio Rank: 89
JULW Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
JULW Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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. JULW - 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 Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW). 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.

	FEBT	JULW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	1.46	-0.29
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.76	2.24	-0.48
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.38	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	2.00	-0.30
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.88	11.73	-2.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FEBT vs. JULW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is comparable to the JULW Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and JULW, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FEBT	JULW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.17	1.46	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.18	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.37	1.29	+0.08

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and JULW is 0.90, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

FEBT vs. JULW - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor JULW has paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.04%

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. JULW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, which is greater than JULW's maximum drawdown of -9.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and JULW.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	JULW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-9.49%	-3.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-6.47%	-2.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.49%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.13%	-1.72%	-2.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.22%	-0.94%	-0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.70%	1.10%	+0.60%

Volatility

FEBT vs. JULW - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a higher volatility of 3.88% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) at 2.38%. This indicates that FEBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JULW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	JULW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.88%	2.38%	+1.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.11%	3.44%	+2.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.59%	8.67%	+3.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.88%	6.86%	+3.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.88%	6.61%	+3.27%