JULU ranks 25th and CAUG 33rd of 51 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 15% Category.
CAUG vs JULU
0.0%by weight
CAUG −0.44pt a year
0.30%0.74%
JULU 45.1×the volume
41018.5K
CAUG vs JULU Performance
−0.4%−0.8%
- CAUG 0.30%, better
- JULU 0.74%
- CAUG $1M
- JULU $80M
- CAUG
- JULU +7.7%
- CAUG 4
- JULU 2
- CAUG 410 sh
- JULU 18.5K sh, better
- CAUG $25.21
- JULU $32.53
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | CAUG | JULU |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A83Higher | C51 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | C48Higher | F9 |
| Tradability | F14 | C46Higher |
| Holdings | B61 | |
| Durability | F2 | C41Higher |
Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
Same Category. CAUG and JULU are both graded against the same 51 S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
CAUG vs JULU Holdings
How CAUG and JULU differ
0.0%
Shared holdings make up 0.0% of CAUG and 0.0% of JULU.
Level by level
- Holdings0.0%
- Sector98.0%
Sector
| Sector | More in CAUGMore in JULU | CAUG | JULU |
|---|---|---|---|
| Communication | CAUG +1.0 points | 9.9% | 8.9% |
| Technology | CAUG +0.8 points | 40.1% | 39.3% |
| Consumer Discretionary | JULU +0.4 points | 8.7% | 9.1% |
| Financials | JULU +0.4 points | 11.3% | 11.7% |
| Health Care | JULU +0.4 points | 9.4% | 9.8% |
| Energy | JULU +0.3 points | 3.4% | 3.7% |
| Consumer Staples | JULU +0.3 points | 4.4% | 4.7% |
| Industrials | CAUG +0.1 points | 7.6% | 7.5% |
| Utilities | JULU +0.1 points | 1.9% | 2.0% |
| Materials | CAUG +0.1 points | 1.6% | 1.5% |
| Real Estate | Same weight | 1.7% | 1.7% |
Country, concentration and asset class
Country
| Country | More in CAUGMore in JULU | CAUG | JULU |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | Same weight | 99.5% | 99.5% |
| Switzerland | Same weight | 0.3% | 0.3% |
| China | Same weight | 0.1% | 0.1% |
| Mexico | Same weight | 0.1% | 0.1% |
| Ireland | Same weight | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| United Kingdom | Same weight | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Concentration
- CAUG102.8%
- JULU101.3%
- CAUG3
- JULU2
Asset class
- CAUG
- Equity
- JULU
- Equity
Holdings
- Only in CAUG3
- In both0
- Only in JULU2
Only in CAUG
3 securities, 100% of CAUG by weight
- Spy 07/30/2027 151.53 C80.17%
- United States Treasury Note/Bond 2.75% 07/31/202716.73%
- Spy 07/30/2027 757.67 P4.74%
Only in JULU
2 securities, 100% of JULU by weight
- Spy 06/30/2027 36.22 C96.71%
- Spy 06/30/2027 777.39 P4.58%
Weight gaps
CAUG and JULU share no securities.
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
CAUG vs JULU Cost
Overpaying JULU vs CAUG
$8,158
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
CAUG 0.30%
$6,149
JULU 0.74%
$14,307
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | CAUG | JULU | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $545 | $1,319 | $774 |
| 20 | $2,113 | $5,015 | $2,902 |
| 30 | $6,149 | $14,307 | $8,158 |
- 0.30%CAUG, cheaper
- 0.74%JULU
- Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
- Median 0.79%
CAUG cheapest of 51 funds
JULU 18th cheapest of 51 funds
CAUG vs JULU Dividends
- CAUG None
- JULU None
Distribution history
CAUG vs JULU Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- CAUG JULU 9.7%
- Return per unit of risk
- CAUG JULU 0.72
- Worst fall
- CAUG JULU −12.4%
- Market sensitivity
- CAUG 0.00JULU 0.80
CAUG and JULU in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.30% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.74% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.30% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.74% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.30% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.74% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
