IWB vs. FJUN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IWB (iShares Russell 1000 ETF) and FJUN (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - IWB tracks the Russell 1000 Index while FJUN tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index June. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IWB returned 12.20%/yr vs 10.54%/yr for FJUN. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IWB charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FJUN.

Performance

IWB vs. FJUN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWB achieves a 8.01% return, which is significantly higher than FJUN's 4.00% return.

IWB

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -1.04%
• YTD: 8.01%
• 6M: 7.03%
• 1Y: 22.97%
• 3Y*: 20.50%
• 5Y*: 12.20%
• 10Y*: 15.25%

FJUN

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: 4.00%
• 6M: 3.80%
• 1Y: 12.54%
• 3Y*: 13.29%
• 5Y*: 10.54%
• 10Y*: —

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

IWB vs. FJUN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	8.01%	17.18%	24.32%	26.39%	-19.19%	26.32%	24.39%
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	4.00%	11.05%	16.38%	22.30%	-4.95%	11.47%	9.90%

Correlation

The correlation between IWB and FJUN 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2020	0.94

The correlation between IWB and FJUN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

IWB vs. FJUN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IWB	FJUN
Technology	37.3%	39.0%
Financial Services	11.3%	11.1%
Communication Services	10.4%	10.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	9.9%
Industrials	8.7%	7.8%
Healthcare	8.5%	8.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	4.5%
Energy	3.2%	3.1%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.8%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Basic Materials	1.9%	1.7%

Return for Risk

IWB vs. FJUN — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWB

IWB Risk / Return Rank: 57
IWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
IWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
IWB Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
IWB Martin Ratio Rank: 66

FJUN

FJUN Risk / Return Rank: 80
FJUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
FJUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FJUN Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FJUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FJUN Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

IWB vs. FJUN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN). 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.

	IWB	FJUN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	2.23	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	3.38	-0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.48	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	3.05	-0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.56	17.51	-5.95

IWB vs. FJUN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWB Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the FJUN Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWB and FJUN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWB vs. FJUN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWB drawdown since its inception was -55.38%, which is greater than FJUN's maximum drawdown of -13.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWB and FJUN.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWB	FJUN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.38%	-13.26%	-42.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-4.13%	-4.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.09%	-13.26%	-5.83%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.20%	-13.26%	-11.94%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.60%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.98%	-0.97%	-2.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.84%	-1.66%	-9.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	0.72%	+1.27%

Volatility

IWB vs. FJUN - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 1000 ETF (IWB) has a higher volatility of 4.84% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (FJUN) at 0.94%. This indicates that IWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FJUN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWB	FJUN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.84%	0.94%	+3.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.88%	4.40%	+5.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	5.66%	+6.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.20%	10.56%	+6.64%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.15%	10.25%	+7.90%

IWB vs. FJUN - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWB has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FJUN's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWB vs. FJUN - Dividend Comparison

IWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, while FJUN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FJUN FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWB iShares Russell 1000 ETF	0.94%	1.00%	1.14%	1.31%	1.56%	1.09%	1.37%	1.71%	2.06%	1.64%	1.89%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWB and FJUN in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, IWB and FJUN 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, IWB or FJUN?

IWB has higher volatility (4.84%) compared to FJUN (0.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWB dropped -55.38% vs FJUN's -13.26%.

Which ETF is better, IWB or FJUN?

On 5-year performance, IWB leads with 12.20% vs 10.54% for FJUN. On fees, IWB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FJUN has been the lower-risk option at 0.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWB or FJUN?

Over the 5-year period, IWB has performed better with a 12.20% return vs 10.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWB or FJUN?

IWB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJUN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWB or FJUN?

IWB has the higher dividend yield at 0.94%, compared with 0.00% for FJUN.

What is the main difference between IWB and FJUN?

IWB tracks Russell 1000 Index, while FJUN tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index June. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for IWB and 0.85% for FJUN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FJUN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.23 vs 1.84), 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.