JULW vs. DECW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

JULW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF) and DECW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JULW returned 11.73%/yr vs 11.34%/yr for DECW. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

JULW vs. DECW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF (DECW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULW achieves a 3.89% return, which is significantly lower than DECW's 5.02% return.

JULW

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 3.89%
• 6M: 4.58%
• 1Y: 12.90%
• 3Y*: 11.73%
• 5Y*: 8.99%
• 10Y*: —

DECW

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 1.65%
• YTD: 5.02%
• 6M: 5.41%
• 1Y: 15.32%
• 3Y*: 11.34%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JULW vs. DECW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	3.89%	11.57%	12.39%	16.06%	-2.06%
DECW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF	5.02%	11.57%	8.64%	16.16%	-2.77%

Correlation

The correlation between JULW and DECW 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 2, 2022	0.87

The correlation between JULW and DECW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

JULW vs. DECW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JULW	DECW
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

JULW vs. DECW — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULW

JULW Risk / Return Rank: 89
JULW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
JULW Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
JULW Omega Ratio Rank: 92
JULW Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
JULW Martin Ratio Rank: 93

DECW

DECW Risk / Return Rank: 87
DECW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
DECW Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
DECW Omega Ratio Rank: 89
DECW Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
DECW Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

JULW vs. DECW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF (DECW). 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.

	JULW	DECW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	2.76	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.36	4.12	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.56	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	3.99	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.60	20.35	+4.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JULW vs. DECW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULW Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is comparable to the DECW Sharpe Ratio of 2.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULW and DECW, 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

	JULW	DECW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.79	2.76	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	1.55	-0.15

Drawdowns

JULW vs. DECW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULW drawdown since its inception was -9.49%, which is greater than DECW's maximum drawdown of -8.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULW and DECW.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULW	DECW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.49%	-8.76%	-0.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.96%	-3.86%	+0.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.49%	-8.76%	-0.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.49%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.04%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-0.86%	-0.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.53%	0.75%	-0.22%

Volatility

JULW vs. DECW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) is 0.27%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF (DECW) has a volatility of 0.73%. This indicates that JULW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DECW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULW	DECW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.27%	0.73%	-0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.23%	3.97%	-0.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.65%	5.58%	-0.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.88%	7.11%	-0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.54%	7.11%	-0.57%

JULW vs. DECW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both JULW and DECW have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

JULW vs. DECW - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULW nor DECW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
DECW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Dec ETF	0.00%	0.00%	1.17%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULW and DECW in my portfolio?

JULW and DECW 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.

Which is riskier, JULW or DECW?

DECW has higher volatility (0.73%) compared to JULW (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULW dropped -9.49% vs DECW's -8.76%.

Which ETF is better, JULW or DECW?

On 3-year performance, JULW leads with 11.73% vs 11.34% for DECW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, JULW has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULW or DECW?

Over the 3-year period, JULW has performed better with a 11.73% return vs 11.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULW or DECW?

JULW and DECW have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULW or DECW?

JULW and DECW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JULW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 2.76), 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.