JULB vs. MARU

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) and MARU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. JULB is actively managed, while MARU is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.95 means they have usually moved in the same direction. JULB charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for MARU.

Performance

JULB vs. MARU - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULB achieves a 8.08% return, which is significantly higher than MARU's 6.56% return.

JULB

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: 0.57%
• 6M: 7.15%
• YTD: 8.08%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

MARU

• 1D: 0.69%
• 1M: 0.09%
• 6M: 5.38%
• YTD: 6.56%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.50%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	$122.17K	$181.25K	$221.75K
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF	$19.91K	$26.97K	$31.51K

JULB vs. MARU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	8.08%	2.44%
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF	6.56%	1.96%

Correlation

The correlation between JULB and MARU is 0.95, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.95

Return for Risk

JULB vs. MARU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

JULB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

MARU

MARU Risk / Return Rank: 51
MARU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
MARU Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
MARU Omega Ratio Rank: 46
MARU Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
MARU Martin Ratio Rank: 58

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

JULB vs. MARU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU). 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.

	JULB	MARU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.22	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.73	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.22	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.03	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	7.00	—

Drawdowns

JULB vs. MARU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULB drawdown since its inception was -5.24%, smaller than the maximum MARU drawdown of -9.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULB and MARU.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULB	MARU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.24%	-9.91%	+4.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-6.56%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.20%	-1.74%	+1.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-1.63%	+0.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.90%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	JULB	MARU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.98%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.29%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.81%	10.89%	-4.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.81%	12.01%	-5.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.81%	12.01%	-5.20%

JULB vs. MARU - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than MARU's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULB vs. MARU - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULB nor MARU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULB and MARU in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, JULB and MARU 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 ETF is better, JULB or MARU?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULB or MARU?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MARU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULB or MARU?

JULB and MARU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between JULB and MARU?

They also come from different issuers: Aptus and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for JULB and 0.74% for MARU.