JULU vs. BUFP
JULU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. JULU is actively managed, while BUFP is passively managed. Over the past year, JULU returned 19.68% vs 16.64% for BUFP. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.
Performance
JULU vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JULU achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 5.33% return.
JULU
- 1D
- -2.62%
- 1M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- 6.33%
- 6M
- 6.00%
- 1Y
- 19.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFP
- 1D
- -1.03%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 5.33%
- 6M
- 5.81%
- 1Y
- 16.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JULU vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
JULU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF | 6.33% | 12.19% | 5.59% |
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF | 5.33% | 12.92% | 5.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between JULU and BUFP is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024 | 0.90 |
The correlation between JULU and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
JULU vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank
JULU
BUFP
JULU vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.
| JULU | BUFP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.55 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.81 | 3.79 | -0.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.55 | 21.13 | -9.57 |
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
| JULU | BUFP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.97 | 2.63 | -0.66 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.11 | 1.34 | -0.23 |
Drawdowns
JULU vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JULU drawdown since its inception was -12.46%, roughly equal to the maximum BUFP drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULU and BUFP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JULU | BUFP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.46% | -11.98% | -0.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.04% | -4.41% | -2.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.92% | -1.06% | -1.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.93% | -1.00% | -0.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.71% | 0.79% | +0.92% |
Volatility
JULU vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison
AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) has a higher volatility of 3.73% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 1.37%. This indicates that JULU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JULU | BUFP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.73% | 1.37% | +2.36% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.77% | 4.94% | +2.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.03% | 6.36% | +3.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.52% | 9.50% | +2.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.52% | 9.50% | +2.02% |
JULU vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison
JULU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
JULU vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison
JULU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.02% |
JULU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JULU and BUFP have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
JULU has higher volatility (3.73%) compared to BUFP (1.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULU dropped -12.46% vs BUFP's -11.98%.
On 1-year performance, JULU leads with 19.68% vs 16.64% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 1.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, JULU has performed better with a 19.68% return vs 16.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for JULU.
BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for JULU.
They also come from different issuers: Allianz and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JULU and 0.50% for BUFP.
BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.97), 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 JULU and BUFP
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