JULU vs. FEBT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

JULU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF) and FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JULU is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Allianz, while FEBT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULU returned 22.22% vs 20.53% for FEBT. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

JULU vs. FEBT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULU achieves a 9.19% return, which is significantly higher than FEBT's 8.10% return.

JULU

• 1D: 0.43%
• 1M: 4.24%
• YTD: 9.19%
• 6M: 9.04%
• 1Y: 22.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBT

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 8.10%
• 6M: 9.05%
• 1Y: 20.53%
• 3Y*: 16.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULU vs. FEBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JULU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF	9.19%	12.19%	5.59%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	8.10%	12.72%	5.75%

Correlation

The correlation between JULU and FEBT is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024	0.92

The correlation between JULU and FEBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULU vs. FEBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULU

JULU Risk / Return Rank: 71
JULU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
JULU Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
JULU Omega Ratio Rank: 71
JULU Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
JULU Martin Ratio Rank: 72

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 82
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

JULU vs. FEBT - 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 Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). 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	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.31	2.69	-0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.24	3.88	-0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.52	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	3.41	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.12	17.43	-4.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JULU vs. FEBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULU Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is comparable to the FEBT Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULU and FEBT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JULU	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.31	2.69	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.27	1.65	-0.38

Drawdowns

JULU vs. FEBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULU drawdown since its inception was -12.46%, smaller than the maximum FEBT drawdown of -13.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULU and FEBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULU	FEBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.46%	-13.19%	+0.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.04%	-6.04%	-1.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.19%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	-0.16%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.93%	-1.18%	-0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.70%	1.18%	+0.52%

Volatility

JULU vs. FEBT - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) has a higher volatility of 2.71% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) at 1.22%. This indicates that JULU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FEBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULU	FEBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.71%	1.22%	+1.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.27%	5.98%	+1.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.66%	7.66%	+2.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.36%	9.75%	+1.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.36%	9.75%	+1.61%

JULU vs. FEBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both JULU and FEBT have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

JULU vs. FEBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULU nor FEBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
JULU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULU and FEBT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, JULU and FEBT 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, JULU or FEBT?

JULU has higher volatility (2.71%) compared to FEBT (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULU dropped -12.46% vs FEBT's -13.19%.

Which ETF is better, JULU or FEBT?

On 1-year performance, JULU leads with 22.22% vs 20.53% for FEBT. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FEBT has been the lower-risk option at 1.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULU or FEBT?

Over the 1-year period, JULU has performed better with a 22.22% return vs 20.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULU or FEBT?

JULU and FEBT have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULU or FEBT?

JULU and FEBT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between JULU and FEBT?

JULU is categorized as Defined Outcome, while FEBT is Options Trading.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.31), 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.