SIXF vs. FLJJ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SIXF (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Feb/Aug ETF) and FLJJ (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SIXF returned 17.25% vs 15.88% for FLJJ. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Feb/Aug ETF (SIXF) 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, SIXF achieves a 6.42% return, which is significantly higher than FLJJ's 5.39% return.

SIXF

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 6.42%
• 6M: 6.62%
• 1Y: 17.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLJJ

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 0.93%
• YTD: 5.39%
• 6M: 5.53%
• 1Y: 15.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SIXF Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Feb/Aug ETF	6.42%	13.14%	12.53%
FLJJ Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF	5.39%	11.35%	14.40%

Correlation

The correlation between SIXF and FLJJ 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.91

The correlation between SIXF and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SIXF vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SIXF

SIXF Risk / Return Rank: 86
SIXF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
SIXF Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
SIXF Omega Ratio Rank: 90
SIXF Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
SIXF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

FLJJ

FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 92
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
FLJJ Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Feb/Aug ETF (SIXF) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	SIXF	FLJJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.78	3.31	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.06	5.17	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.71	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	4.13	-0.54
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.63	21.85	-3.23

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIXF Sharpe Ratio is 2.78, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIXF 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.

Drawdowns

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIXF drawdown since its inception was -11.25%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIXF and FLJJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SIXF	FLJJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.25%	-6.91%	-4.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.82%	-3.86%	-0.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	0.00%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.79%	-0.77%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.93%	0.73%	+0.20%

Volatility

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Feb/Aug ETF (SIXF) has a higher volatility of 1.66% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 1.24%. This indicates that SIXF'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

	SIXF	FLJJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.66%	1.24%	+0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.97%	3.76%	+1.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.24%	4.83%	+1.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.72%	6.19%	+2.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.72%	6.19%	+2.53%

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SIXF and FLJJ have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

SIXF vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither SIXF nor FLJJ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SIXF and FLJJ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, SIXF 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, SIXF or FLJJ?

SIXF has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to FLJJ (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIXF dropped -11.25% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

Which ETF is better, SIXF or FLJJ?

On 1-year performance, SIXF leads with 17.25% vs 15.88% for FLJJ. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FLJJ has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SIXF or FLJJ?

Over the 1-year period, SIXF has performed better with a 17.25% return vs 15.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SIXF or FLJJ?

SIXF and FLJJ have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

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

SIXF and FLJJ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.31 vs 2.78), 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.