XMAR vs. JULQ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

XMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March) and JULQ (Innovator Premium Income 40 Barrier ETF - July) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. XMAR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for JULQ.

Performance

XMAR vs. JULQ - 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 - March (XMAR) and Innovator Premium Income 40 Barrier ETF - July (JULQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

XMAR

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.13%
• YTD: 6.66%
• 6M: 7.46%
• 1Y: 13.17%
• 3Y*: 11.18%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULQ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XMAR vs. JULQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March	6.00%
JULQ Innovator Premium Income 40 Barrier ETF - July	0.00%

XMAR vs. JULQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XMAR	JULQ
Technology	36.2%	31.7%
Financial Services	11.9%	14.0%
Communication Services	10.9%	9.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.4%
Healthcare	8.4%	10.9%
Industrials	8.1%	7.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	6.2%
Energy	3.5%	3.2%
Utilities	2.3%	2.6%
Real Estate	1.9%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

XMAR vs. JULQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMAR

XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
XMAR 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.

XMAR vs. JULQ - 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 - March (XMAR) and Innovator Premium Income 40 Barrier ETF - July (JULQ). 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.

	XMAR	JULQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.40	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	7.61	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.22	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.04	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	69.02	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XMAR	JULQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.40	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.13	—	—

Drawdowns

XMAR vs. JULQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAR drawdown since its inception was -7.29%, which is greater than JULQ's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAR and JULQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMAR	JULQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.29%	0.00%	-7.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.48%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	0.00%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.30%	0.00%	-0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.19%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	XMAR	JULQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.66%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.40%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.01%	0.00%	+3.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.56%	0.00%	+5.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.56%	0.00%	+5.56%

XMAR vs. JULQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than JULQ's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMAR vs. JULQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither XMAR nor JULQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, XMAR or JULQ?

On fees, JULQ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XMAR or JULQ?

JULQ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XMAR or JULQ?

XMAR and JULQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between XMAR and JULQ?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XMAR and 0.79% for JULQ.