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

Performance

JANP vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP) 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, JANP achieves a 6.28% return, which is significantly higher than FLJJ's 5.01% return.


JANP

1D
0.18%
1M
2.17%
YTD
6.28%
6M
7.29%
1Y
17.90%
3Y*
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)

JANP vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between JANP and FLJJ is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.95

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

0.93

The correlation between JANP and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.95 - 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

JANP vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

JANP
JANP Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
JANP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JANP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
JANP Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
JANP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
JANP Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

JANP vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP) 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.


JANPFLJJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.65

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.38

3.99

-0.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.62

20.94

-3.32

JANP vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JANP Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JANP 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


JANPFLJJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.66

3.03

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.63

2.14

-0.50

Drawdowns

JANP vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JANP drawdown since its inception was -12.18%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JANP and FLJJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JANPFLJJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.18%

-6.91%

-5.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.32%

-3.86%

-1.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.01%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.90%

-0.78%

-0.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

0.73%

+0.29%

Volatility

JANP vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP) has a higher volatility of 1.36% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 0.83%. This indicates that JANP'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


JANPFLJJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.36%

0.83%

+0.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.53%

3.58%

+1.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.76%

5.08%

+1.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.06%

6.20%

+2.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.06%

6.20%

+2.86%

JANP vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JANP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FLJJ's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

JANP vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither JANP nor FLJJ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, JANP 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.

JANP has higher volatility (1.36%) compared to FLJJ (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JANP dropped -12.18% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

On 1-year performance, JANP leads with 17.90% vs 15.33% for FLJJ. On fees, JANP is cheaper at 0.50% 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, JANP has performed better with a 17.90% return vs 15.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

JANP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FLJJ.

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

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for JANP and 0.74% for FLJJ.

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.66), 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 JANP 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