GFEB vs. FLJJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GFEB (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February) and FLJJ (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF) are both Options Trading funds. GFEB is passively managed, while FLJJ is actively managed. Over the past year, GFEB returned 15.17% vs 15.29% for FLJJ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GFEB charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for FLJJ.

Performance

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFEB achieves a 5.83% return, which is significantly higher than FLJJ's 4.98% return.

GFEB

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 1.89%
• YTD: 5.83%
• 6M: 6.55%
• 1Y: 15.17%
• 3Y*: 13.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLJJ

• 1D: -0.00%
• 1M: 1.88%
• YTD: 4.98%
• 6M: 5.80%
• 1Y: 15.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February	5.83%	11.19%	11.76%
FLJJ Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF	4.98%	11.35%	14.19%

Correlation

The correlation between GFEB and FLJJ is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.88

The correlation between GFEB and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GFEB	FLJJ
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

GFEB vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFEB

GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 84
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

FLJJ

FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 89
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FLJJ 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.

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) 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.

	GFEB	FLJJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.77	3.02	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.09	4.67	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.65	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	3.98	-0.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.40	20.87	-2.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFEB 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GFEB	FLJJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.77	3.02	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.79	2.14	-0.35

Drawdowns

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFEB drawdown since its inception was -9.63%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFEB and FLJJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GFEB	FLJJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.63%	-6.91%	-2.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.46%	-3.86%	-0.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.21%	-0.05%	-0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.69%	-0.78%	+0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.83%	0.73%	+0.10%

Volatility

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) has a higher volatility of 0.91% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 0.86%. This indicates that GFEB'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.

Volatility by Period

	GFEB	FLJJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.91%	0.86%	+0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.21%	3.59%	+0.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.51%	5.10%	+0.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.57%	6.21%	+1.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.57%	6.21%	+1.36%

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFEB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJJ's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

GFEB vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither GFEB nor FLJJ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GFEB and FLJJ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, GFEB 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.

Which is riskier, GFEB or FLJJ?

GFEB has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to FLJJ (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFEB dropped -9.63% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

Which ETF is better, GFEB or FLJJ?

On 1-year performance, FLJJ leads with 15.29% vs 15.17% for GFEB. On fees, FLJJ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GFEB or FLJJ?

Over the 1-year period, FLJJ has performed better with a 15.29% return vs 15.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GFEB or FLJJ?

FLJJ is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GFEB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GFEB or FLJJ?

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

What is the main difference between GFEB and FLJJ?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GFEB and 0.74% for FLJJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 2.77), 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.