JULT vs. OCTW

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

JULT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF) and OCTW (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JULT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while OCTW is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust. JULT is actively managed, while OCTW is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, JULT returned 11.27%/yr vs 8.95%/yr for OCTW. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

JULT vs. OCTW - 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 AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULT achieves a 6.69% return, which is significantly higher than OCTW's 5.74% return.

JULT

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 5.80%
• YTD: 6.69%
• 1Y: 14.13%
• 3Y*: 14.12%
• 5Y*: 11.27%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.89%

OCTW

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: 0.76%
• 6M: 5.10%
• YTD: 5.74%
• 1Y: 10.80%
• 3Y*: 10.42%
• 5Y*: 8.95%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.96%

*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)
JULT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF	$809.92K	$2.14M	$1.31M
OCTW AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF	$584.65K	$1.46M	$4.73M

JULT vs. OCTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
JULT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF	6.69%	13.73%	17.43%	21.34%	-5.57%	9.60%	5.83%
OCTW AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF	5.74%	9.68%	8.67%	17.57%	0.54%	6.48%	3.94%

Correlation

The correlation between JULT and OCTW is 0.94, 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.	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2020	0.87

The correlation between JULT and OCTW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULT vs. OCTW — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULT

JULT Risk / Return Rank: 81
JULT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
JULT Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
JULT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
JULT Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
JULT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

OCTW

OCTW Risk / Return Rank: 86
OCTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
OCTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
OCTW Omega Ratio Rank: 89
OCTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
OCTW Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

JULT vs. OCTW - 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 AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW). 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.

	JULT	OCTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.02	-0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	2.98	-0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.40	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.51	2.77	-0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.26	14.05	-0.79

JULT vs. OCTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULT Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the OCTW Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULT and OCTW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

JULT vs. OCTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULT drawdown since its inception was -13.57%, which is greater than OCTW's maximum drawdown of -8.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULT and OCTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULT	OCTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.57%	-8.38%	-5.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.22%	-3.65%	-1.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.57%	-8.38%	-5.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.57%	-8.38%	-5.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.46%	0.00%	-0.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.74%	-0.80%	-0.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	0.72%	+0.27%

Volatility

JULT vs. OCTW - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) has a higher volatility of 2.29% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW) at 1.20%. This indicates that JULT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OCTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULT	OCTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.29%	1.20%	+1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.43%	3.90%	+1.53%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.04%	5.00%	+2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.01%	6.33%	+4.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.39%	6.10%	+4.29%

JULT vs. OCTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both JULT and OCTW have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

JULT vs. OCTW - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULT nor OCTW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
JULT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.86%
OCTW AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULT and OCTW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, JULT and OCTW 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 is riskier, JULT or OCTW?

JULT has higher volatility (2.29%) compared to OCTW (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULT dropped -13.57% vs OCTW's -8.38%.

Which ETF is better, JULT or OCTW?

On 5-year performance, JULT leads with 11.27% vs 8.95% for OCTW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, OCTW has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULT or OCTW?

Over the 5-year period, JULT has performed better with a 11.27% return vs 8.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULT or OCTW?

JULT and OCTW have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULT or OCTW?

JULT and OCTW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between JULT and OCTW?

JULT is categorized as Options Trading, while OCTW is Defined Outcome.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

OCTW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.86), 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.