JANZ vs. FMAR
JANZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF) and FMAR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, JANZ returned 9.89%/yr vs 10.55%/yr for FMAR. Their correlation of 0.94 means they have usually moved in the same direction. JANZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FMAR.
Performance
JANZ vs. FMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JANZ achieves a 7.35% return, which is significantly lower than FMAR's 11.00% return.
JANZ
- 1D
- 0.71%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- 6M
- 6.49%
- YTD
- 7.35%
- 1Y
- 15.58%
- 3Y*
- 13.92%
- 5Y*
- 9.89%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.44%
FMAR
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- 6M
- 10.29%
- YTD
- 11.00%
- 1Y
- 16.94%
- 3Y*
- 13.46%
- 5Y*
- 10.55%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 11.29%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $611.88K | $574.52K | $1.78M | |
| $139.93K | $79.26K | $602.93K |
JANZ vs. FMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JANZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF | 7.35% | 12.47% | 18.10% | 19.09% | -11.43% | 16.38% |
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March | 11.00% | 9.69% | 14.61% | 20.39% | -5.51% | 11.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between JANZ and FMAR is 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.91 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2021 | 0.94 |
The correlation between JANZ and FMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 - 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
JANZ vs. FMAR — Risk / Return Rank
JANZ
FMAR
JANZ vs. FMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF (JANZ) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR). 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.
| JANZ | FMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.71 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.92 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.71 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.09 | 6.85 | -4.77 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.30 | 39.91 | -31.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
JANZ vs. FMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JANZ drawdown since its inception was -18.11%, which is greater than FMAR's maximum drawdown of -14.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JANZ and FMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JANZ | FMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.11% | -14.36% | -3.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.83% | -2.36% | -4.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.33% | -12.37% | -1.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.11% | -14.36% | -3.75% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.37% | 0.00% | -1.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.44% | -2.08% | -1.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.72% | 0.41% | +1.31% |
Volatility
JANZ vs. FMAR - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF (JANZ) has a higher volatility of 2.97% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) at 1.46%. This indicates that JANZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JANZ | FMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.97% | 1.46% | +1.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.21% | 4.47% | +3.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.45% | 5.26% | +5.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.26% | 10.45% | +2.81% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.97% | 10.24% | +2.73% |
JANZ vs. FMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
JANZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than FMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
JANZ vs. FMAR - Dividend Comparison
JANZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.32%, while FMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
JANZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF | 1.32% | 1.42% | 2.70% | 2.58% | 0.21% | 4.52% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, JANZ and FMAR 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.
JANZ has higher volatility (2.97%) compared to FMAR (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JANZ dropped -18.11% vs FMAR's -14.36%.
On 5-year performance, FMAR leads with 10.55% vs 9.89% for JANZ. On fees, JANZ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, FMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FMAR has performed better with a 10.55% return vs 9.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
JANZ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FMAR.
JANZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.32%, compared with 0.00% for FMAR.
They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JANZ and 0.85% for FMAR.
FMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 vs 1.36), 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.
Find the right allocation for JANZ and FMAR
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