PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBW vs. FLJJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBW achieves a 4.48% return, which is significantly lower than FLJJ's 5.39% return.


FEBW

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.34%
YTD
4.48%
6M
4.67%
1Y
13.16%
3Y*
10.76%
5Y*
10Y*

FLJJ

1D
0.13%
1M
0.93%
YTD
5.39%
6M
5.53%
1Y
15.88%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FEBW and FLJJ 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024

0.88

The correlation between FEBW and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.91 - 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

FEBW vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBW
FEBW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
FEBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBW Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBW Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

FLJJ
FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLJJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). 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.


FEBWFLJJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.58

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.71

-0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.31

4.13

-0.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.02

21.85

-4.83

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBW and FLJJ, 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

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBW drawdown since its inception was -8.82%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBW and FLJJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBWFLJJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.82%

-6.91%

-1.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.00%

-3.86%

-0.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.27%

0.00%

-0.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.67%

-0.77%

+0.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.77%

0.73%

+0.04%

Volatility

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) has a higher volatility of 1.41% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 1.24%. This indicates that FEBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBWFLJJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.41%

1.24%

+0.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.99%

3.76%

+0.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.85%

4.83%

+0.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.30%

6.19%

+0.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.30%

6.19%

+0.11%

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FEBW and FLJJ have an expense ratio of 0.74%.


Dividends

FEBW vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBW nor FLJJ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, FEBW and FLJJ 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.

FEBW has higher volatility (1.41%) compared to FLJJ (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBW dropped -8.82% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

On 1-year performance, FLJJ leads with 15.88% vs 13.16% for FEBW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FLJJ has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FLJJ has performed better with a 15.88% return vs 13.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBW and FLJJ have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

FEBW and FLJJ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.31 vs 2.73), 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 FEBW and FLJJ

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