XYLG vs. PJUL
XYLG (Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF) and PJUL (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - July) are both exchange-traded funds - XYLG is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Half BuyWrite Index, while PJUL is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index July. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XYLG returned 10.83%/yr vs 10.48%/yr for PJUL. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XYLG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for PJUL.
Performance
XYLG vs. PJUL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XYLG achieves a 8.26% return, which is significantly higher than PJUL's 4.63% return.
XYLG
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 3.53%
- YTD
- 8.26%
- 6M
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- 24.07%
- 3Y*
- 16.78%
- 5Y*
- 10.83%
- 10Y*
- —
PJUL
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 1.23%
- YTD
- 4.63%
- 6M
- 5.37%
- 1Y
- 15.92%
- 3Y*
- 13.91%
- 5Y*
- 10.48%
- 10Y*
- —
XYLG vs. PJUL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XYLG Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 8.26% | 12.93% | 22.31% | 18.16% | -15.46% | 23.81% | 12.13% |
PJUL Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - July | 4.63% | 12.78% | 13.76% | 19.87% | -2.08% | 7.20% | 4.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between XYLG and PJUL is 0.84, 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 | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2020 | 0.88 |
The correlation between XYLG and PJUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.
XYLG vs. PJUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XYLG
PJUL
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
XYLG
PJUL
Financial Services
XYLG
PJUL
Communication Services
XYLG
PJUL
Consumer Cyclical
XYLG
PJUL
Healthcare
XYLG
PJUL
Industrials
XYLG
PJUL
Consumer Defensive
XYLG
PJUL
Energy
XYLG
PJUL
Utilities
XYLG
PJUL
Real Estate
XYLG
PJUL
Basic Materials
XYLG
PJUL
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
XYLG vs. PJUL — Risk / Return Rank
XYLG
PJUL
XYLG vs. PJUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF (XYLG) and Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - July (PJUL). 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.
| XYLG | PJUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.55 | 2.82 | -0.28 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.59 | 4.27 | -0.68 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.61 | -0.13 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.56 | 4.51 | -0.95 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.01 | 24.83 | -6.82 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XYLG | PJUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.55 | 2.82 | -0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 | 1.22 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.99 | 0.89 | +0.10 |
Drawdowns
XYLG vs. PJUL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XYLG drawdown since its inception was -21.30%, which is greater than PJUL's maximum drawdown of -18.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XYLG and PJUL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XYLG | PJUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.30% | -18.17% | -3.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.93% | -3.64% | -3.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.42% | -10.69% | -6.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.30% | -10.69% | -10.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | 0.00% | -0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.10% | -1.47% | -2.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.37% | 0.66% | +0.71% |
Volatility
XYLG vs. PJUL - Volatility Comparison
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF (XYLG) has a higher volatility of 2.55% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - July (PJUL) at 0.45%. This indicates that XYLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PJUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XYLG | PJUL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.55% | 0.45% | +2.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.58% | 3.89% | +3.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.49% | 5.67% | +3.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.00% | 8.60% | +5.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.87% | 10.03% | +3.84% |
XYLG vs. PJUL - Expense Ratio Comparison
XYLG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PJUL's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
XYLG vs. PJUL - Dividend Comparison
XYLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.01%, while PJUL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PJUL Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - July | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.82% |
XYLG Global X S&P 500 Covered Call & Growth ETF | 13.01% | 13.94% | 23.65% | 4.90% | 6.43% | 7.40% | 1.39% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XYLG and PJUL have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XYLG has higher volatility (2.55%) compared to PJUL (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XYLG dropped -21.30% vs PJUL's -18.17%.
On 5-year performance, XYLG leads with 10.83% vs 10.48% for PJUL. On fees, XYLG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, PJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, XYLG has performed better with a 10.83% return vs 10.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XYLG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for PJUL.
XYLG has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 0.00% for PJUL.
XYLG is categorized as Derivative Income, while PJUL is Defined Outcome. XYLG tracks Cboe S&P 500 Half BuyWrite Index, while PJUL tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index July. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XYLG and 0.79% for PJUL.
PJUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 2.55), 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.
Find the right allocation for XYLG and PJUL
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