SEPZ vs. FLJJ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SEPZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF) and FLJJ (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF) are both Options Trading funds. SEPZ is passively managed, while FLJJ is actively managed. Over the past year, SEPZ returned 21.27% vs 15.33% for FLJJ. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SEPZ charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for FLJJ.

Performance

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF (SEPZ) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SEPZ achieves a 8.74% return, which is significantly higher than FLJJ's 5.01% return.

SEPZ

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 4.08%
• YTD: 8.74%
• 6M: 8.67%
• 1Y: 21.27%
• 3Y*: 16.65%
• 5Y*: 11.65%
• 10Y*: —

FLJJ

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 1.60%
• YTD: 5.01%
• 6M: 5.83%
• 1Y: 15.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SEPZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF	8.74%	13.18%	15.93%
FLJJ Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF	5.01%	11.35%	14.19%

Correlation

The correlation between SEPZ and FLJJ is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.93

The correlation between SEPZ and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SEPZ	FLJJ
Technology	35.3%	36.2%
Financial Services	13.4%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	10.1%
Communication Services	9.9%	10.9%
Healthcare	8.8%	8.4%
Industrials	7.8%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	4.9%
Energy	3.0%	3.5%
Utilities	2.5%	2.3%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.6%	1.8%

Return for Risk

SEPZ vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SEPZ

SEPZ Risk / Return Rank: 66
SEPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
SEPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
SEPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 63
SEPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
SEPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 72

FLJJ

FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 89
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 94
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
FLJJ Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF (SEPZ) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). 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.

	SEPZ	FLJJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	3.03	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	4.68	-1.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.65	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.93	3.99	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.26	20.94	-7.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SEPZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SEPZ and FLJJ, 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

	SEPZ	FLJJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	3.03	-0.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	2.14	-1.08

Drawdowns

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SEPZ drawdown since its inception was -15.22%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEPZ and FLJJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SEPZ	FLJJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.22%	-6.91%	-8.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.30%	-3.86%	-3.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.22%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.36%	-0.01%	-0.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.84%	-0.78%	-2.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.61%	0.73%	+0.88%

Volatility

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF (SEPZ) has a higher volatility of 2.67% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 0.83%. This indicates that SEPZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SEPZ	FLJJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.67%	0.83%	+1.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.29%	3.58%	+3.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.96%	5.08%	+4.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.29%	6.20%	+6.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.45%	6.20%	+6.25%

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SEPZ has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJJ's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

SEPZ vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

SEPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%, while FLJJ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FLJJ Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SEPZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (September) ETF	2.02%	2.20%	3.62%	3.55%	0.69%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SEPZ and FLJJ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, SEPZ and FLJJ 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, SEPZ or FLJJ?

SEPZ has higher volatility (2.67%) compared to FLJJ (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SEPZ dropped -15.22% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

Which ETF is better, SEPZ or FLJJ?

On 1-year performance, SEPZ leads with 21.27% vs 15.33% for FLJJ. On fees, FLJJ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FLJJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SEPZ or FLJJ?

Over the 1-year period, SEPZ has performed better with a 21.27% return vs 15.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SEPZ or FLJJ?

FLJJ is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for SEPZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SEPZ or FLJJ?

SEPZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.00% for FLJJ.

What is the main difference between SEPZ and FLJJ?

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for SEPZ and 0.74% for FLJJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.14), 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.