JUNT vs. IVVM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JUNT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF) and IVVM (iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JUNT returned 13.99% vs 16.27% for IVVM. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JUNT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IVVM.

Performance

JUNT vs. IVVM - 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 iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). 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 IVVM's 5.95% return.

JUNT

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

IVVM

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 1.95%
• YTD: 5.95%
• 6M: 6.15%
• 1Y: 16.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNT vs. IVVM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JUNT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF	4.25%	12.42%	16.03%	6.30%
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	5.95%	14.24%	16.08%	5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNT and IVVM 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2023	0.91

The correlation between JUNT and IVVM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

JUNT vs. IVVM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JUNT	IVVM
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. IVVM — 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

IVVM

IVVM Risk / Return Rank: 72
IVVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
IVVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
IVVM Omega Ratio Rank: 79
IVVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
IVVM Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. IVVM - 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 iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). 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	IVVM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.32	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	3.33	+0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.48	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	3.08	+0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.87	15.34	+4.53
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. IVVM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNT Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the IVVM Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNT and IVVM, 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	IVVM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.42	2.32	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.59	1.49	+0.09

Drawdowns

JUNT vs. IVVM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNT drawdown since its inception was -12.78%, which is greater than IVVM's maximum drawdown of -11.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNT and IVVM.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNT	IVVM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.78%	-11.62%	-1.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.08%	-5.31%	+1.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.22%	-0.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.98%	-0.92%	-0.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.71%	1.06%	-0.35%

Volatility

JUNT vs. IVVM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) is 0.55%, while iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM) has a volatility of 0.76%. This indicates that JUNT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IVVM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JUNT	IVVM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	0.76%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.37%	5.62%	-1.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.82%	7.04%	-1.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.24%	9.62%	-0.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.24%	9.62%	-0.38%

JUNT vs. IVVM - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than IVVM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

JUNT vs. IVVM - Dividend Comparison

JUNT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	0.65%	0.68%	0.62%
JUNT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNT and IVVM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, JUNT and IVVM 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 IVVM?

IVVM has higher volatility (0.76%) compared to JUNT (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNT dropped -12.78% vs IVVM's -11.62%.

Which ETF is better, JUNT or IVVM?

On 1-year performance, IVVM leads with 16.27% vs 13.99% for JUNT. On fees, IVVM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. 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 IVVM?

Over the 1-year period, IVVM has performed better with a 16.27% return vs 13.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNT or IVVM?

IVVM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for JUNT.

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

IVVM has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for JUNT.

What is the main difference between JUNT and IVVM?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JUNT and 0.50% for IVVM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JUNT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 2.32), 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.