PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XJUL vs. FEBP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XJUL vs. FEBP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July (XJUL) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XJUL achieves a 3.67% return, which is significantly lower than FEBP's 6.79% return.


XJUL

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.91%
YTD
3.67%
6M
4.43%
1Y
10.57%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FEBP

1D
-0.26%
1M
2.45%
YTD
6.79%
6M
7.87%
1Y
18.57%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XJUL vs. FEBP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between XJUL and FEBP is 0.90, 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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024

0.88

The correlation between XJUL and FEBP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

XJUL vs. FEBP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XJUL
XJUL Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
XJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
XJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
XJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
XJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

FEBP
FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XJUL vs. FEBP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July (XJUL) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). 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.


XJULFEBPDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.51

2.68

-0.17

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.76

3.85

-0.10

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.53

+0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.85

3.41

+0.44

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

20.87

17.60

+3.27

XJUL vs. FEBP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the FEBP Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XJUL and FEBP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XJULFEBPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.51

2.68

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.44

1.53

-0.09

Drawdowns

XJUL vs. FEBP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XJUL drawdown since its inception was -9.10%, smaller than the maximum FEBP drawdown of -12.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XJUL and FEBP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XJULFEBPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.10%

-12.11%

+3.01%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.76%

-5.47%

+2.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.11%

-0.26%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.58%

-0.91%

+0.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.51%

1.06%

-0.55%

Volatility

XJUL vs. FEBP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July (XJUL) is 0.32%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a volatility of 1.42%. This indicates that XJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XJULFEBPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.32%

1.42%

-1.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.20%

5.44%

-2.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.23%

6.96%

-2.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.99%

8.98%

-1.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.99%

8.98%

-1.99%

XJUL vs. FEBP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XJUL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FEBP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

XJUL vs. FEBP - Dividend Comparison

Neither XJUL nor FEBP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.90, XJUL and FEBP 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.

FEBP has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to XJUL (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XJUL dropped -9.10% vs FEBP's -12.11%.

On 1-year performance, FEBP leads with 18.57% vs 10.57% for XJUL. On fees, FEBP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, XJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FEBP has performed better with a 18.57% return vs 10.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XJUL.

XJUL and FEBP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XJUL and 0.50% for FEBP.

FEBP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 2.51), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XJUL and FEBP

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer