XJUL vs. GMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XJUL (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds from FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, XJUL returned 10.57% vs 15.30% for GMAR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

XJUL vs. GMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XJUL achieves a 3.67% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 7.89% return.

XJUL

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

GMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.52%
• YTD: 7.89%
• 6M: 8.66%
• 1Y: 15.30%
• 3Y*: 12.24%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XJUL vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XJUL FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July	3.67%	10.19%	10.58%	4.06%
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March	7.89%	9.29%	12.14%	4.32%

Correlation

The correlation between XJUL and GMAR is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 25, 2023	0.82

The correlation between XJUL and GMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XJUL vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

XJUL

XJUL Risk / Return Rank: 84
XJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
XJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
XJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 88
XJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
XJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 91

GMAR

GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
GMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. GMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.

	XJUL	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	3.94	-1.43
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	6.60	-2.84
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	2.02	-0.46
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	8.56	-4.71
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.87	59.52	-38.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XJUL vs. GMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is lower than the GMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XJUL and GMAR, 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

	XJUL	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	3.94	-1.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.44	1.91	-0.47

Drawdowns

XJUL vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XJUL drawdown since its inception was -9.10%, roughly equal to the maximum GMAR drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XJUL and GMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	XJUL	GMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.10%	-9.11%	+0.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.76%	-1.79%	-0.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.10%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.58%	-0.54%	-0.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.51%	0.26%	+0.25%

Volatility

XJUL vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July (XJUL) is 0.32%, while FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) has a volatility of 0.69%. This indicates that XJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XJUL	GMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	0.69%	-0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.20%	2.99%	+0.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.23%	3.90%	+0.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.99%	6.84%	+0.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.99%	6.84%	+0.15%

XJUL vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XJUL and GMAR have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

XJUL vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither XJUL nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XJUL and GMAR in my portfolio?

XJUL and GMAR have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XJUL or GMAR?

GMAR has higher volatility (0.69%) compared to XJUL (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XJUL dropped -9.10% vs GMAR's -9.11%.

Which ETF is better, XJUL or GMAR?

On 1-year performance, GMAR leads with 15.30% vs 10.57% for XJUL. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, XJUL or GMAR?

Over the 1-year period, GMAR has performed better with a 15.30% return vs 10.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XJUL or GMAR?

XJUL and GMAR have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XJUL or GMAR?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 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.