JULB vs. MMAX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) and MMAX (iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. JULB charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for MMAX.

Performance

JULB vs. MMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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 MMAX's 3.72% return.

JULB

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

MMAX

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.44%
• 6M: 3.24%
• YTD: 3.72%
• 1Y: 6.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.42%

*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
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	$75.73K	$146.75K	$150.47K

JULB vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	8.08%	2.44%
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	3.72%	1.62%

Correlation

The correlation between JULB and MMAX is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.66

Return for Risk

JULB vs. MMAX — 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.

MMAX

MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 98
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. MMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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	MMAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	4.70	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	8.13	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	2.16	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	14.68	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	69.13	—

Drawdowns

JULB vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULB drawdown since its inception was -5.24%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULB and MMAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULB	MMAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.24%	-1.93%	-3.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.20%	0.00%	-0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-0.10%	-0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.10%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	JULB	MMAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.38%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	1.08%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.81%	1.44%	+5.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.81%	2.40%	+4.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.81%	2.40%	+4.41%

JULB vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than MMAX's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULB vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

JULB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%.

Position	TTM	2025
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	1.27%	1.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULB and MMAX in my portfolio?

JULB and MMAX have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, JULB or MMAX?

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 MMAX?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MMAX.

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

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for JULB.

What is the main difference between JULB and MMAX?

They also come from different issuers: Aptus and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for JULB and 0.50% for MMAX.