QSPT vs. JULJ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QSPT (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September) and JULJ (Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July) are both exchange-traded funds - QSPT is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by FT Vest, while JULJ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QSPT returned 20.91% vs 5.54% for JULJ. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QSPT charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for JULJ.

Performance

QSPT vs. JULJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QSPT achieves a 9.68% return, which is significantly higher than JULJ's 1.84% return.

QSPT

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 2.86%
• YTD: 9.68%
• 6M: 9.71%
• 1Y: 20.91%
• 3Y*: 18.73%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULJ

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.26%
• YTD: 1.84%
• 6M: 2.34%
• 1Y: 5.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QSPT vs. JULJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QSPT FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September	9.68%	14.58%	16.07%	11.59%
JULJ Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July	1.84%	5.91%	6.17%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between QSPT and JULJ is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 5, 2023	0.65

The correlation between QSPT and JULJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

QSPT vs. JULJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QSPT	JULJ
Technology	53.8%	33.6%
Communication Services	16.1%	10.5%
Consumer Cyclical	13.3%	10.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	5.3%
Healthcare	4.5%	9.5%
Industrials	3.7%	8.5%
Utilities	1.4%	2.5%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.9%
Energy	0.5%	4.0%
Financial Services	0.4%	12.4%
Real Estate	0.2%	2.0%

Return for Risk

QSPT vs. JULJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSPT

QSPT Risk / Return Rank: 68
QSPT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
QSPT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
QSPT Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QSPT Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
QSPT Martin Ratio Rank: 70

JULJ

JULJ Risk / Return Rank: 96
JULJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
JULJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
JULJ Omega Ratio Rank: 97
JULJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
JULJ Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

QSPT vs. JULJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ). 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.

	QSPT	JULJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.21	3.61	-1.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.07	6.02	-2.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.87	-0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.91	9.17	-6.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.00	47.60	-34.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QSPT vs. JULJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSPT Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is lower than the JULJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSPT and JULJ, 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

	QSPT	JULJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.21	3.61	-1.40
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	1.96	-1.14

Drawdowns

QSPT vs. JULJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSPT drawdown since its inception was -22.64%, which is greater than JULJ's maximum drawdown of -3.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSPT and JULJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	QSPT	JULJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.64%	-3.62%	-19.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-0.61%	-6.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.61%	-0.10%	-4.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	0.12%	+1.49%

Volatility

QSPT vs. JULJ - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) has a higher volatility of 1.21% compared to Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ) at 0.17%. This indicates that QSPT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JULJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QSPT	JULJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.21%	0.17%	+1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.53%	0.94%	+6.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.51%	1.54%	+7.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.14%	3.08%	+12.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.14%	3.08%	+12.06%

QSPT vs. JULJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QSPT has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than JULJ's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

QSPT vs. JULJ - Dividend Comparison

QSPT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JULJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.66%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
JULJ Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July	5.66%	5.76%	5.96%	3.21%
QSPT FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QSPT and JULJ in my portfolio?

QSPT and JULJ have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QSPT or JULJ?

QSPT has higher volatility (1.21%) compared to JULJ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSPT dropped -22.64% vs JULJ's -3.62%.

Which ETF is better, QSPT or JULJ?

On 1-year performance, QSPT leads with 20.91% vs 5.54% for JULJ. On fees, JULJ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, JULJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QSPT or JULJ?

Over the 1-year period, QSPT has performed better with a 20.91% return vs 5.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QSPT or JULJ?

JULJ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QSPT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QSPT or JULJ?

JULJ has the higher dividend yield at 5.66%, compared with 0.00% for QSPT.

What is the main difference between QSPT and JULJ?

QSPT is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while JULJ is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QSPT and 0.79% for JULJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JULJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.61 vs 2.21), 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.