PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULT vs. GMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

JULT vs. GMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

JULT vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
JULT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF
-1.45%13.73%17.43%18.39%
GMAR
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March
2.32%9.29%12.14%11.95%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULT achieves a -1.45% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 2.32% return.


JULT

1D
0.61%
1M
-2.22%
YTD
-1.45%
6M
0.64%
1Y
15.35%
3Y*
14.79%
5Y*
9.96%
10Y*

GMAR

1D
0.48%
1M
1.40%
YTD
2.32%
6M
4.36%
1Y
12.40%
3Y*
11.31%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


JULT vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

JULT vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULT
JULT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
JULT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULT Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
JULT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULT Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

GMAR
GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
GMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

JULT vs. GMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.


JULTGMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.25

1.46

-0.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.89

2.14

-0.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.46

-0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.79

1.84

-0.05

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.77

11.96

-2.20

JULT vs. GMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULT Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the GMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULT and GMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JULTGMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.25

1.46

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.05

1.71

-0.66

Correlation

The correlation between JULT and GMAR is 0.89, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

JULT vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULT nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM202520242023202220212020
JULT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%3.86%
GMAR
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

JULT vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULT drawdown since its inception was -13.57%, which is greater than GMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULT and GMAR.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


JULTGMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.57%

-9.11%

-4.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.72%

-6.85%

-1.87%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.74%

0.00%

-2.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.82%

-0.57%

-1.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.60%

1.05%

+0.55%

Volatility

JULT vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) has a higher volatility of 3.71% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 2.22%. This indicates that JULT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


JULTGMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.71%

2.22%

+1.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.66%

2.87%

+2.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.36%

8.50%

+3.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.96%

6.96%

+4.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.60%

6.96%

+3.64%