JULM vs. NFTY
JULM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July) and NFTY (First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JULM is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust, while NFTY is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the NIFTY 50 Equal Weight Index. JULM is actively managed, while NFTY is passively managed. Over the past year, JULM returned 7.30% vs -7.39% for NFTY. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. JULM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for NFTY.
Performance
JULM vs. NFTY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JULM achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly higher than NFTY's -8.94% return.
JULM
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.72%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 6M
- 3.18%
- 1Y
- 7.30%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NFTY
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- -1.60%
- YTD
- -8.94%
- 6M
- -7.97%
- 1Y
- -7.39%
- 3Y*
- 6.09%
- 5Y*
- 4.80%
- 10Y*
- 8.17%
JULM vs. NFTY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
JULM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July | 2.70% | 6.91% | 3.56% |
NFTY First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF | -8.94% | 5.47% | -7.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between JULM and NFTY is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.45 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2024 | 0.40 |
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
JULM vs. NFTY — Risk / Return Rank
JULM
NFTY
JULM vs. NFTY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July (JULM) and First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF (NFTY). 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.
| JULM | NFTY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +3.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +6.07 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.78 | 0.93 | +0.86 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.67 | -0.46 | +5.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 27.16 | -1.20 | +28.36 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| JULM | NFTY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.37 | -0.50 | +3.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.40 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.92 | 0.28 | +1.64 |
Drawdowns
JULM vs. NFTY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JULM drawdown since its inception was -4.42%, smaller than the maximum NFTY drawdown of -47.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULM and NFTY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JULM | NFTY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.42% | -47.67% | +43.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.57% | -16.14% | +14.57% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -21.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -47.67% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -16.76% | +16.76% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.33% | -9.58% | +9.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.27% | 6.16% | -5.89% |
Volatility
JULM vs. NFTY - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July (JULM) is 0.17%, while First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF (NFTY) has a volatility of 4.59%. This indicates that JULM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NFTY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JULM | NFTY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.17% | 4.59% | -4.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.69% | 12.58% | -10.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.17% | 14.73% | -12.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.76% | 17.38% | -13.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.76% | 20.71% | -16.95% |
JULM vs. NFTY - Expense Ratio Comparison
JULM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than NFTY's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
JULM vs. NFTY - Dividend Comparison
JULM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NFTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JULM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - July | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NFTY First Trust India NIFTY 50 Equal Weight ETF | 1.94% | 1.24% | 1.61% | 0.13% | 5.89% | 1.53% | 0.61% | 0.97% | 0.00% | 4.10% | 3.28% | 4.39% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JULM and NFTY have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NFTY has higher volatility (4.59%) compared to JULM (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULM dropped -4.42% vs NFTY's -47.67%.
On 1-year performance, JULM leads with 7.30% vs -7.39% for NFTY. On fees, NFTY is cheaper at 0.80% per year. On volatility, JULM has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, JULM has performed better with a 7.30% return vs -7.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
NFTY is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for JULM.
NFTY has the higher dividend yield at 1.94%, compared with 0.00% for JULM.
JULM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while NFTY is Asia Pacific Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for JULM and 0.80% for NFTY.
JULM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.37 vs -0.50), 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 JULM and NFTY
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