JUNZ vs. RNWZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JUNZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF) and RNWZ (TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JUNZ is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Return Index, while RNWZ is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by TrueShares. JUNZ is passively managed, while RNWZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JUNZ returned 16.22%/yr vs 12.63%/yr for RNWZ. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. JUNZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RNWZ.

Performance

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) and TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). 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 RNWZ's 16.28% return.

JUNZ

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

RNWZ

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -2.61%
• YTD: 16.28%
• 6M: 16.86%
• 1Y: 38.19%
• 3Y*: 12.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
JUNZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF	8.42%	12.83%	17.32%	17.28%	-1.14%
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	16.28%	36.33%	-7.36%	-3.89%	-0.19%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNZ and RNWZ is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022	0.43

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JUNZ	RNWZ
Technology	32.7%	-
Financial Services	13.7%	6.9%
Healthcare	10.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	-
Communication Services	9.5%	-
Industrials	7.3%	5.3%
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	-
Energy	3.2%	3.8%
Utilities	2.6%	41.0%
Real Estate	2.2%	3.2%
Basic Materials	1.8%	4.5%

Return for Risk

JUNZ vs. RNWZ — 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

RNWZ

RNWZ Risk / Return Rank: 80
RNWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
RNWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
RNWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 76
RNWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
RNWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. RNWZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) and TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ). 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	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.55	-0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	3.40	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.45	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	6.33	-3.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.27	15.60	-4.33
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. RNWZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the RNWZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNZ and RNWZ, 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	RNWZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.55	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	0.61	+0.24

Drawdowns

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNZ drawdown since its inception was -17.88%, smaller than the maximum RNWZ drawdown of -24.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNZ and RNWZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNZ	RNWZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.88%	-24.90%	+7.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.27%	-6.06%	-2.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.06%	-24.74%	+10.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.88%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-4.46%	+4.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-7.19%	+2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	2.45%	-0.57%

Volatility

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) is 2.45%, while TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that JUNZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RNWZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JUNZ	RNWZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.45%	5.06%	-2.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.85%	11.86%	-4.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.01%	15.06%	-5.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.74%	16.99%	-5.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.73%	16.99%	-5.26%

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than RNWZ's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

JUNZ vs. RNWZ - Dividend Comparison

JUNZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, more than RNWZ's 1.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
JUNZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF	2.12%	2.30%	3.97%	6.03%	0.56%	0.32%
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF	1.93%	2.12%	2.36%	3.87%	0.01%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNZ and RNWZ in my portfolio?

JUNZ and RNWZ have a correlation of 0.38, 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 RNWZ?

RNWZ has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to JUNZ (2.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNZ dropped -17.88% vs RNWZ's -24.90%.

Which ETF is better, JUNZ or RNWZ?

On 3-year performance, JUNZ leads with 16.22% vs 12.63% for RNWZ. On fees, RNWZ is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, JUNZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JUNZ or RNWZ?

Over the 3-year period, JUNZ has performed better with a 16.22% return vs 12.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNZ or RNWZ?

RNWZ is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JUNZ.

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

JUNZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 1.93% for RNWZ.

What is the main difference between JUNZ and RNWZ?

JUNZ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while RNWZ is Energy Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JUNZ and 0.75% for RNWZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RNWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 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.