QCOC vs. JULB

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QCOC (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCOC charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

QCOC vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with QCOC having a 6.29% return and JULB slightly higher at 6.52%.

QCOC

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 1.76%
• YTD: 6.29%
• 6M: 6.43%
• 1Y: 14.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULB

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 2.16%
• YTD: 6.52%
• 6M: 7.06%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCOC vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCOC FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October	6.29%	1.71%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	6.52%	2.56%

Correlation

The correlation between QCOC and JULB is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2025	0.92

Return for Risk

QCOC vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCOC

QCOC Risk / Return Rank: 77
QCOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QCOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
QCOC Omega Ratio Rank: 86
QCOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
QCOC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

QCOC vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). 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.

	QCOC	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.49	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.55	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.46	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QCOC	JULB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.32	2.21	-0.89

Drawdowns

QCOC vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCOC drawdown since its inception was -10.45%, which is greater than JULB's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCOC and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCOC	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.45%	-5.24%	-5.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.21%	0.00%	-0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.07%	-0.87%	-0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.02%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QCOC	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.88%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.91%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.91%	6.79%	-0.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.39%	6.79%	+2.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.39%	6.79%	+2.60%

QCOC vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCOC has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCOC vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCOC nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCOC and JULB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, QCOC and JULB 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 ETF is better, QCOC or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCOC or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCOC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QCOC or JULB?

QCOC and JULB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QCOC and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCOC and 0.25% for JULB.