JUNT vs. FEBT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JUNT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF) and FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JUNT returned 14.17%/yr vs 16.37%/yr for FEBT. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

JUNT vs. FEBT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) 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, JUNT achieves a 4.25% return, which is significantly lower than FEBT's 7.90% return.

JUNT

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 4.25%
• 6M: 5.06%
• 1Y: 13.99%
• 3Y*: 14.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBT

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 6M: 8.78%
• 1Y: 20.34%
• 3Y*: 16.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNT vs. FEBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JUNT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF	4.25%	12.42%	16.03%	10.62%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	7.90%	12.72%	17.29%	11.80%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNT 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2023	0.93

The correlation between JUNT and FEBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

JUNT vs. FEBT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JUNT	FEBT
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

JUNT vs. FEBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

JUNT

JUNT Risk / Return Rank: 80
JUNT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
JUNT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
JUNT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
JUNT Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
JUNT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 81
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

JUNT vs. FEBT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) 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.

	JUNT	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.67	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	3.85	-0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.52	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	3.38	+0.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.87	17.26	+2.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JUNT vs. FEBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNT Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the FEBT Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNT 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

	JUNT	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.42	2.67	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.59	1.64	-0.06

Drawdowns

JUNT vs. FEBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNT drawdown since its inception was -12.78%, roughly equal to the maximum FEBT drawdown of -13.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNT and FEBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNT	FEBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.78%	-13.19%	+0.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.08%	-6.04%	+1.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.78%	-13.19%	+0.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.34%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.98%	-1.18%	+0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.71%	1.18%	-0.47%

Volatility

JUNT vs. FEBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) is 0.55%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a volatility of 1.28%. This indicates that JUNT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JUNT	FEBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	1.28%	-0.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.37%	5.98%	-1.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.82%	7.67%	-1.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.24%	9.75%	-0.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.24%	9.75%	-0.51%

JUNT vs. FEBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

JUNT vs. FEBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither JUNT 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%
JUNT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNT and FEBT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, JUNT 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, JUNT or FEBT?

FEBT has higher volatility (1.28%) compared to JUNT (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNT dropped -12.78% vs FEBT's -13.19%.

Which ETF is better, JUNT or FEBT?

On 3-year performance, FEBT leads with 16.37% vs 14.17% for JUNT. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, JUNT has been the lower-risk option at 0.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JUNT or FEBT?

Over the 3-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 16.37% return vs 14.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNT or FEBT?

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

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.42), 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.