JANU vs. QBSF

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

JANU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jan ETF) and QBSF (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds from AllianzIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JANU returned 16.00% vs 7.85% for QBSF. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JANU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.64%/yr for QBSF.

Performance

JANU vs. QBSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jan ETF (JANU) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JANU achieves a 7.84% return, which is significantly higher than QBSF's 3.18% return.

JANU

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 1.38%
• 6M: 6.40%
• YTD: 7.84%
• 1Y: 16.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QBSF

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.67%
• 6M: 2.89%
• YTD: 3.18%
• 1Y: 7.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JANU vs. QBSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JANU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jan ETF	7.84%	8.10%
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF	3.18%	4.79%

Correlation

The correlation between JANU and QBSF is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025	0.79

The correlation between JANU and QBSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JANU vs. QBSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

JANU

JANU Risk / Return Rank: 60
JANU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
JANU Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
JANU Omega Ratio Rank: 55
JANU Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
JANU Martin Ratio Rank: 66

QBSF

QBSF Risk / Return Rank: 94
QBSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QBSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
QBSF Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QBSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
QBSF Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

JANU vs. QBSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jan ETF (JANU) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF). 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.

	JANU	QBSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.54	2.92	-1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	4.51	-2.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.65	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.63	4.96	-2.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.46	19.02	-9.56

JANU vs. QBSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JANU Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is lower than the QBSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JANU and QBSF, 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

JANU vs. QBSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JANU drawdown since its inception was -11.84%, which is greater than QBSF's maximum drawdown of -1.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JANU and QBSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	JANU	QBSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.84%	-1.58%	-10.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.98%	-1.58%	-4.40%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	0.00%	-0.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.87%	-0.20%	-1.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.66%	0.41%	+1.25%

Volatility

JANU vs. QBSF - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jan ETF (JANU) has a higher volatility of 3.74% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) at 0.64%. This indicates that JANU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JANU	QBSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.74%	0.64%	+3.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.54%	1.90%	+5.64%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.23%	2.69%	+7.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.58%	2.68%	+8.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.58%	2.68%	+8.90%

JANU vs. QBSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

JANU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than QBSF's 0.64% expense ratio.

Dividends

JANU vs. QBSF - Dividend Comparison

Neither JANU nor QBSF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JANU and QBSF in my portfolio?

JANU and QBSF have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JANU or QBSF?

JANU has higher volatility (3.74%) compared to QBSF (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JANU dropped -11.84% vs QBSF's -1.58%.

Which ETF is better, JANU or QBSF?

On 1-year performance, JANU leads with 16.00% vs 7.85% for QBSF. On fees, QBSF is cheaper at 0.64% per year. On volatility, QBSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JANU or QBSF?

Over the 1-year period, JANU has performed better with a 16.00% return vs 7.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JANU or QBSF?

QBSF is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for JANU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JANU or QBSF?

JANU and QBSF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between JANU and QBSF?

Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JANU and 0.64% for QBSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QBSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 1.54), 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.