Skip to content

FJUL vs SIXJ

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July

FJULCCboe

AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

SIXJBCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

SIXJ −0.11pt a year

FJUL0.85%SIXJ0.74%

Avg volume · 30D

FJUL 3.2×the volume

FJUL48.5KSIXJ15.1K

3Y return · a year

FJUL +2.4pt

FJUL+17.3%SIXJ+14.9%

FJUL vs SIXJ Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+10.5%FJUL+10.5%SIXJ

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. FJUL +10.5%. SIXJ +10.5%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−2.5%0%2.5%5%12.5%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
FJUL 0.85%
SIXJ 0.74%, better
Fund size
FJUL $1.41B
SIXJ $149M
1Y total return
FJUL +10.5%
SIXJ +10.5%
Holdings
FJUL 3
SIXJ 3
Avg volume (30D)
FJUL 48.5K sh, better
SIXJ 15.1K sh
NAV per share
FJUL $60.97
SIXJ $37.56
52W range

ETF.net Grade

FJUL: Cost 11, Risk 58, Mission not scored, Tradability 82, Holdings 65, Durability 85. SIXJ: Cost 68, Risk 67, Mission not scored, Tradability 70, Holdings 53, Durability 57.
Pillar letters and Scores for FJUL, SIXJ, with each pillar’s weight
PillarFJULSIXJ
Cost30% weightF11B68Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightB58B67Higher
Tradability15% weightA82HigherA70
Holdings10% weightB65HigherC53
Durability5% weightA85HigherB57

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. FJUL and SIXJ are both graded against the same 77 S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 9-12%⁠

Category · 77 funds
See all 77 ›

SIXJ ranks 4th and FJUL 44th of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.

  1. Rank 1AZALTInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - QuarterlyScore 77
  2. Rank 2BAUGPPGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - AugustScore 67
  3. Rank 3BTENJiShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETFScore 66
  4. Rank 4BSIXJAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETFScore 65
  5. Rank 5BBUFMAB Moderate Buffer ETFScore 64
  6. Rank 44CFAPRFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - AprilScore 46
  7. Rank 44CFJULFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - JulyScore 46
  8. Rank 44CFMARFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - MarchScore 46

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FJULCFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July

SIXJBAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

In short

FJUL The July rung of First Trust's twelve-month buffer ladder: 10% of SPY's price-return losses absorbed, upside capped, and the whole contract reset each July. Running since 2020.

SIXJ Most buffer ETFs lock you into a 12-month cycle. SIXJ runs a six-month one, resetting each January and July: it tracks SPY's share-price move, absorbs the first 10% of losses, and takes a fresh upside cap twice a year.

Stated mandate

FJUL The Fund seeks returns matching the price return of the State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust up to a 16.82% upside cap, while buffering the first 10% of losses during the July 20, 2026–July 16, 2027 outcome period.

SIXJ The Fund seeks to match the share-price return of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust over a six-month outcome period, subject to an upside cap and protection against the first 10% of losses.

Why people hold it

  • FJUL The terms are written down before you show up: a 10% downside buffer on SPY's price return and a stated upside cap, both fixed for the July-to-July outcome period.ftportfolios.com
  • Twelve identical monthly siblings run on the same recipe (FJAN through FDEC), so start dates can be laddered instead of hinging on one July entry.
  • Live since 2020 and now a billion-dollar-plus fund, it is a seasoned rung of the ladder with many annual resets behind it.
  • SIXJ The 10% buffer and the cap reset every January 1 and July 1, so terms refresh twice a year instead of on the usual annual clock.
  • 0.74% expense ratio, on the lean side for a defined-outcome fund and below the typical fee among its shallow-buffer peers.
  • The reference asset is SPY itself, the original S&P 500 ETF, so the payoff is keyed to a plain vanilla benchmark rather than a bespoke index.
  • Rates among the stronger implementations in a crowded shallow-buffer field, alongside AllianzIM's other six-month siblings like SIXZ and SIXD.

Worth knowing

  • FJUL At 0.85% a year it sits above the buffer group's 0.79% median, and well above cheaper builds like ZALT (0.69%) or the laddered BUFB (0.10%).
  • The reference is SPY's price return, so dividends sit outside the buffered math, and the fund itself has made no distributions.
  • Buffer and cap are defined for the full July-to-July window; buy mid-period and your own cap and remaining buffer differ from the headline terms.ftportfolios.com
  • SIXJ Buffer and cap are designed to work over the full six-month period. Buy mid-period and you get whatever cushion and upside room remain at that moment.
  • It tracks SPY's share-price return, so dividends aren't passed through and the fund isn't structured to pay income.
  • Volume is light next to the largest buffer funds, so bid-ask spreads can run wider, especially in fast-moving markets.

Full FJUL profile⁠

Full SIXJ profile⁠

FJUL vs SIXJ Holdings

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.

FJUL vs SIXJ Cost

Overpaying FJUL vs SIXJ

$1,892

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • FJUL 0.85%

    $16,199

  • SIXJ 0.74%

    $14,307

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • FJUL 0.85%
  • SIXJ 0.74%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530FJUL $16,199SIXJ $14,307

Year by year

YearFJULSIXJOverpaying
10$1,508$1,319$189
20$5,706$5,015$691
30$16,199$14,307$1,892

Expense ratio

  • 0.85%FJUL
  • 0.74%SIXJ, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

SIXJ 17th cheapest of 77 funds

FJUL 60th cheapest of 77 funds

FJUL vs SIXJ Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
FJUL None
SIXJ None

Distribution history

FJULAll FJUL payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SIXJAll SIXJ payments⁠

No distribution history available.

FJUL vs SIXJ Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
FJUL 7.8%SIXJ 5.9%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
FJUL 1.53SIXJ 1.67, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
FJUL −13.1%SIXJ −14.1%since Jan 2022
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
FJUL 0.64SIXJ 0.46

Popular comparisons

  • FJULCvsZALTA

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July · Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SIXJBvsZALTA

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FJULCvsAUGPB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SIXJBvsAUGPB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FJULCvsTENJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • SIXJBvsTENJB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.