JULW vs. PJAN

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

JULW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF) and PJAN (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January) are both exchange-traded funds - JULW is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while PJAN is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect January Series Index. JULW is actively managed, while PJAN is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, JULW returned 8.98%/yr vs 9.01%/yr for PJAN. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULW charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for PJAN.

Performance

JULW vs. PJAN - 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 Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULW achieves a 3.87% return, which is significantly lower than PJAN's 5.40% return.

JULW

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.91%
• YTD: 3.87%
• 6M: 4.75%
• 1Y: 13.47%
• 3Y*: 11.71%
• 5Y*: 8.98%
• 10Y*: —

PJAN

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 5.40%
• 6M: 6.33%
• 1Y: 15.55%
• 3Y*: 13.06%
• 5Y*: 9.01%
• 10Y*: —

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

JULW vs. PJAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
JULW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF	3.87%	11.57%	12.39%	16.06%	-1.09%	4.60%	6.95%
PJAN Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January	5.40%	11.29%	13.45%	18.18%	-5.29%	8.80%	8.82%

Correlation

The correlation between JULW and PJAN is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2020	0.85

The correlation between JULW and PJAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULW vs. PJAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULW

JULW Risk / Return Rank: 90
JULW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
JULW Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
JULW Omega Ratio Rank: 92
JULW Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
JULW Martin Ratio Rank: 93

PJAN

PJAN Risk / Return Rank: 82
PJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
PJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 89
PJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
PJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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. PJAN - 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 Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN). 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	PJAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.90	2.69	+0.21
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.54	3.96	+0.58
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.58	+0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.63	3.42	+1.21
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	26.08	18.26	+7.82
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. PJAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULW Sharpe Ratio is 2.90, which is comparable to the PJAN Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULW and PJAN, 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	PJAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.90	2.69	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.31	1.02	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	0.90	+0.49

Drawdowns

JULW vs. PJAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULW drawdown since its inception was -9.49%, smaller than the maximum PJAN drawdown of -21.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULW and PJAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULW	PJAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.49%	-21.25%	+11.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.96%	-4.63%	+1.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.49%	-10.49%	+1.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.49%	-11.93%	+2.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-1.73%	+0.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.53%	0.87%	-0.34%

Volatility

JULW vs. PJAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) is 0.35%, while Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN) has a volatility of 1.06%. This indicates that JULW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PJAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULW	PJAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.35%	1.06%	-0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.23%	4.70%	-1.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.67%	5.81%	-1.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.88%	8.92%	-2.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.54%	10.61%	-4.07%

JULW vs. PJAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than PJAN's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULW vs. PJAN - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULW nor PJAN has paid dividends to shareholders.

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%
PJAN Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULW and PJAN in my portfolio?

JULW and PJAN have a correlation of 0.89, 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 PJAN?

PJAN has higher volatility (1.06%) compared to JULW (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULW dropped -9.49% vs PJAN's -21.25%.

Which ETF is better, JULW or PJAN?

On 5-year performance, PJAN leads with 9.01% vs 8.98% for JULW. On fees, JULW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, JULW has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULW or PJAN?

Over the 5-year period, PJAN has performed better with a 9.01% return vs 8.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULW or PJAN?

JULW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for PJAN.

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

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

What is the main difference between JULW and PJAN?

JULW is categorized as Options Trading, while PJAN is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JULW and 0.79% for PJAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JULW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.90 vs 2.69), 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.