FJP vs. AUMI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FJP (First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund) and AUMI (Themes Gold Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Japan Index, while AUMI is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FJP returned 33.53% vs 48.97% for AUMI. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FJP charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for AUMI.

Performance

FJP vs. AUMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FJP) and Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FJP achieves a 14.28% return, which is significantly higher than AUMI's -5.96% return.

FJP

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 2.90%
• YTD: 14.28%
• 6M: 15.85%
• 1Y: 33.53%
• 3Y*: 21.60%
• 5Y*: 10.81%
• 10Y*: 7.48%

AUMI

• 1D: -2.93%
• 1M: -3.79%
• YTD: -5.96%
• 6M: -0.21%
• 1Y: 48.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FJP vs. AUMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FJP First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund	14.28%	33.60%	5.80%	0.95%
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	-5.96%	164.18%	30.61%	4.25%

Correlation

The correlation between FJP and AUMI is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2023	0.33

FJP vs. AUMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FJP	AUMI
Industrials	45.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.0%	-
Basic Materials	9.7%	99.5%
Technology	8.9%	-
Utilities	6.1%	-
Financial Services	5.6%	-
Energy	4.2%	-
Healthcare	3.6%	-
Real Estate	3.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	-
Communication Services	0.7%	0.2%

Return for Risk

FJP vs. AUMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FJP

FJP Risk / Return Rank: 46
FJP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FJP Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
FJP Omega Ratio Rank: 46
FJP Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FJP Martin Ratio Rank: 44

AUMI

AUMI Risk / Return Rank: 28
AUMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
AUMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
AUMI Omega Ratio Rank: 29
AUMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
AUMI Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

FJP vs. AUMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FJP) and Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI). 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.

	FJP	AUMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	1.03	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.28	1.48	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.20	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.33	1.54	+0.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.20	3.94	+3.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FJP vs. AUMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FJP Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is higher than the AUMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FJP and AUMI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FJP	AUMI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.63	1.03	+0.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.53	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.40	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.32	1.55	-1.23

Drawdowns

FJP vs. AUMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FJP drawdown since its inception was -41.51%, which is greater than AUMI's maximum drawdown of -31.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FJP and AUMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	FJP	AUMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.51%	-31.88%	-9.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.43%	-31.88%	+17.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.02%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.88%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.34%	-29.25%	+22.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.46%	-7.06%	-4.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.67%	12.46%	-7.79%

Volatility

FJP vs. AUMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FJP) is 6.51%, while Themes Gold Miners ETF (AUMI) has a volatility of 14.46%. This indicates that FJP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AUMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FJP	AUMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.51%	14.46%	-7.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.87%	38.54%	-21.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.70%	47.95%	-27.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.35%	41.57%	-21.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.88%	41.57%	-22.69%

FJP vs. AUMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FJP has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than AUMI's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

FJP vs. AUMI - Dividend Comparison

FJP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, more than AUMI's 0.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AUMI Themes Gold Miners ETF	0.92%	0.86%	1.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FJP First Trust Japan AlphaDEX Fund	2.49%	2.68%	3.18%	3.49%	2.21%	2.43%	0.99%	2.80%	1.54%	1.29%	1.46%	0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FJP and AUMI in my portfolio?

FJP and AUMI have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FJP or AUMI?

AUMI has higher volatility (14.46%) compared to FJP (6.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FJP dropped -41.51% vs AUMI's -31.88%.

Which ETF is better, FJP or AUMI?

On 1-year performance, AUMI leads with 48.97% vs 33.53% for FJP. On fees, AUMI is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FJP has been the lower-risk option at 6.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FJP or AUMI?

Over the 1-year period, AUMI has performed better with a 48.97% return vs 33.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FJP or AUMI?

AUMI is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FJP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FJP or AUMI?

FJP has the higher dividend yield at 2.49%, compared with 0.92% for AUMI.

What is the main difference between FJP and AUMI?

FJP is categorized as Japan Equities, while AUMI is Gold. FJP tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Japan Index, while AUMI tracks Solactive Global Pure Gold Miners Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FJP and 0.35% for AUMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FJP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 1.03), 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.