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

Performance

GMAY 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 - May (GMAY) 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, GMAY achieves a 4.67% return, which is significantly lower than FLJJ's 5.01% return.


GMAY

1D
0.23%
1M
1.48%
YTD
4.67%
6M
5.36%
1Y
12.68%
3Y*
12.29%
5Y*
10Y*

FLJJ

1D
0.03%
1M
1.60%
YTD
5.01%
6M
5.83%
1Y
15.33%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GMAY and FLJJ is 0.86, 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

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024

0.83

The correlation between GMAY and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
GMAY
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%

Technology

GMAY
36.2%
FLJJ
36.2%

Financial Services

GMAY
11.9%
FLJJ
11.9%

Communication Services

GMAY
10.9%
FLJJ
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

GMAY
10.1%
FLJJ
10.1%

Healthcare

GMAY
8.4%
FLJJ
8.4%

Industrials

GMAY
8.1%
FLJJ
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

GMAY
4.9%
FLJJ
4.9%

Energy

GMAY
3.5%
FLJJ
3.5%

Utilities

GMAY
2.3%
FLJJ
2.3%

Real Estate

GMAY
1.9%
FLJJ
1.9%

Basic Materials

GMAY
1.8%
FLJJ
1.8%

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

GMAY vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMAY
GMAY Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
GMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
GMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

FLJJ
FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLJJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

GMAY 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 - May (GMAY) 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.


GMAYFLJJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.65

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.10

3.99

+0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

24.02

20.94

+3.07

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMAY Sharpe Ratio is 2.68, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMAY 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GMAYFLJJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.68

3.03

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.60

2.14

-0.53

Drawdowns

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMAY drawdown since its inception was -11.75%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMAY and FLJJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GMAYFLJJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.75%

-6.91%

-4.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.11%

-3.86%

+0.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.75%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-0.01%

-0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.72%

-0.78%

+0.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.53%

0.73%

-0.20%

Volatility

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - May (GMAY) has a higher volatility of 1.22% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 0.83%. This indicates that GMAY'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


GMAYFLJJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.22%

0.83%

+0.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.71%

3.58%

+0.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.76%

5.08%

-0.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.84%

6.20%

+1.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.84%

6.20%

+1.64%

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

GMAY vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither GMAY nor FLJJ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GMAY and FLJJ have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GMAY has higher volatility (1.22%) compared to FLJJ (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMAY dropped -11.75% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

On 1-year performance, FLJJ leads with 15.33% vs 12.68% for GMAY. On fees, FLJJ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FLJJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. 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 15.33% return vs 12.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

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

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.68), 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 GMAY 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