JUNZ vs. FMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JUNZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF) and FMAR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. JUNZ is passively managed, while FMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, JUNZ returned 9.84%/yr vs 10.77%/yr for FMAR. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JUNZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FMAR.

Performance

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JUNZ achieves a 8.42% return, which is significantly lower than FMAR's 10.02% return.

JUNZ

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 4.04%
• YTD: 8.42%
• 6M: 8.23%
• 1Y: 21.10%
• 3Y*: 16.22%
• 5Y*: 9.84%
• 10Y*: —

FMAR

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 10.02%
• 6M: 11.01%
• 1Y: 19.13%
• 3Y*: 14.55%
• 5Y*: 10.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
JUNZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF	8.42%	12.83%	17.32%	17.28%	-12.97%	9.81%
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	10.02%	9.69%	14.61%	20.39%	-5.51%	6.21%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNZ and FMAR 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	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2021	0.93

The correlation between JUNZ and FMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JUNZ	FMAR
Technology	32.7%	36.2%
Financial Services	13.7%	11.9%
Healthcare	10.7%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	10.1%
Communication Services	9.5%	10.9%
Industrials	7.3%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	4.9%
Energy	3.2%	3.5%
Utilities	2.6%	2.3%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

JUNZ vs. FMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

JUNZ

JUNZ Risk / Return Rank: 61
JUNZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
JUNZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
JUNZ Omega Ratio Rank: 63
JUNZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
JUNZ Martin Ratio Rank: 63

FMAR

FMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
FMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
FMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR). 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.

	JUNZ	FMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	3.79	-1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	6.08	-3.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.94	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	8.14	-5.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.27	56.00	-44.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is lower than the FMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNZ and FMAR, 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

	JUNZ	FMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	3.79	-1.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	1.04	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	1.10	-0.25

Drawdowns

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNZ drawdown since its inception was -17.88%, which is greater than FMAR's maximum drawdown of -14.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNZ and FMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNZ	FMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.88%	-14.36%	-3.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.27%	-2.36%	-5.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.06%	-12.37%	-1.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.88%	-14.36%	-3.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.21%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-2.14%	-2.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	0.34%	+1.54%

Volatility

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Volatility Comparison

TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) has a higher volatility of 2.45% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) at 0.98%. This indicates that JUNZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JUNZ	FMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.45%	0.98%	+1.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.85%	3.95%	+3.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.01%	5.08%	+4.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.74%	10.45%	+1.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.73%	10.35%	+1.38%

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than FMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

JUNZ vs. FMAR - Dividend Comparison

JUNZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, while FMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JUNZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF	2.12%	2.30%	3.97%	6.03%	0.56%	0.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNZ and FMAR in my portfolio?

JUNZ and FMAR 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, JUNZ or FMAR?

JUNZ has higher volatility (2.45%) compared to FMAR (0.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNZ dropped -17.88% vs FMAR's -14.36%.

Which ETF is better, JUNZ or FMAR?

On 5-year performance, FMAR leads with 10.77% vs 9.84% for JUNZ. On fees, JUNZ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, FMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JUNZ or FMAR?

Over the 5-year period, FMAR has performed better with a 10.77% return vs 9.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNZ or FMAR?

JUNZ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JUNZ or FMAR?

JUNZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 0.00% for FMAR.

What is the main difference between JUNZ and FMAR?

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JUNZ and 0.85% for FMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.79 vs 2.12), 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.