JULW vs. MSTQ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

JULW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF) and MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JULW returned 11.73%/yr vs 23.87%/yr for MSTQ. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULW charges 0.74%/yr vs 1.59%/yr for MSTQ.

Performance

JULW vs. MSTQ - 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 LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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 MSTQ's 16.86% return.

JULW

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

MSTQ

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: 7.24%
• YTD: 16.86%
• 6M: 15.37%
• 1Y: 30.89%
• 3Y*: 23.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JULW vs. MSTQ - 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%	0.94%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	16.86%	20.57%	19.58%	43.10%	-21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between JULW and MSTQ is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2022	0.81

The correlation between JULW and MSTQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

JULW vs. MSTQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JULW	MSTQ
Technology	36.2%	54.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	7.6%
Energy	3.5%	0.6%
Utilities	2.3%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.1%

Return for Risk

JULW vs. MSTQ — 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

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 58
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 63
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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. MSTQ - 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 LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	2.16	+0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.36	2.89	+1.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.37	+0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	2.50	+1.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.60	7.81	+16.79
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. MSTQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULW Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is comparable to the MSTQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULW and MSTQ, 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	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.79	2.16	+0.62
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	0.87	+0.53

Drawdowns

JULW vs. MSTQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULW drawdown since its inception was -9.49%, smaller than the maximum MSTQ drawdown of -31.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULW and MSTQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULW	MSTQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.49%	-31.05%	+21.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.96%	-12.39%	+9.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.49%	-15.22%	+5.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.49%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.66%	+0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-8.61%	+7.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.53%	3.97%	-3.44%

Volatility

JULW vs. MSTQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) is 0.27%, while LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a volatility of 4.25%. This indicates that JULW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULW	MSTQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.27%	4.25%	-3.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.23%	10.57%	-7.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.65%	14.34%	-9.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.88%	18.84%	-11.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.54%	18.84%	-12.30%

JULW vs. MSTQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTQ's 1.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULW vs. MSTQ - Dividend Comparison

JULW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.95%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.04%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	11.95%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULW and MSTQ in my portfolio?

JULW and MSTQ have a correlation of 0.80, 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 MSTQ?

MSTQ has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to JULW (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULW dropped -9.49% vs MSTQ's -31.05%.

Which ETF is better, JULW or MSTQ?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 23.87% vs 11.73% for JULW. On fees, JULW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. 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 MSTQ?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 23.87% return vs 11.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULW or MSTQ?

JULW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

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

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 11.95%, compared with 0.00% for JULW.

What is the main difference between JULW and MSTQ?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Little Harbor Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JULW and 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JULW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 2.16), 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.