Skip to content

GJUL vs PSMR

FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July

GJULCCboe

Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF

PSMRBCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

PSMR −0.36pt a year

GJUL0.85%PSMR0.49%

Avg volume · 30D

GJUL 27.2×the volume

GJUL29.5KPSMR1.08K

3Y return · a year

GJUL +1.7pt

GJUL+13.6%PSMR+11.9%

GJUL vs PSMR Performance

Nov 7, 2025 – Nov 9, 2026

+9.1%GJUL+12.5%PSMR

Nov 7, 2025 to Nov 9, 2026. GJUL +9.1%. PSMR +12.5%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2.5%5%7.5%Nov 2025May 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
GJUL 0.85%
PSMR 0.49%, better
Fund size
GJUL $403M
PSMR $90M
1Y total return
GJUL +9.1%
PSMR +12.5%, better
Holdings
GJUL 3
PSMR 3
Avg volume (30D)
GJUL 29.5K sh, better
PSMR 1.08K sh
NAV per share
GJUL $43.78
PSMR $32.68
52W range

ETF.net Grade

GJUL: Cost 13, Risk 53, Mission not scored, Tradability 72, Holdings 65, Durability 73. PSMR: Cost 70, Risk 56, Mission not scored, Tradability 32, Holdings not scored, Durability 64.
Pillar letters and Scores for GJUL, PSMR, with each pillar’s weight
PillarGJULPSMR
Cost30% weightF13A70Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC53B56Higher
Tradability15% weightA72HigherD32
Holdings10% weightB65Not scored
Durability5% weightA73HigherB64

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds

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

Same Category. GJUL and PSMR are both graded against the same 51 S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 15%⁠

Category · 51 funds
See all 51 ›

PSMR ranks 3rd and GJUL 24th of 51 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 15% Category.

  1. Rank 1BPSMOPacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETFScore 63
  2. Rank 2BPSMJPacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETFScore 60
  3. Rank 3BPSMRPacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETFScore 57
  4. Rank 4BBUFCAB Conservative Buffer ETFScore 56
  5. Rank 24CGFEBFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - FebruaryScore 43
  6. Rank 24CGJULFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - JulyScore 43
  7. Rank 24CGOCTFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - OctoberScore 43

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

GJULCFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July

PSMRBPacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF

In short

GJUL The July door into First Trust's moderate-buffer lineup: it aims to absorb the first 15% of an S&P 500 ETF price decline over a one-year outcome period, and in exchange your upside stops at a cap set when that period begins.

PSMR A 15-point cushion on SPY, reset every April, for 0.49% a year while the typical buffer fund charges more. Pacer and Swan's moderate tier trades away some upside (a cap set each period) for a floor you know going in.

Stated mandate

GJUL The Fund seeks to match the price return of the State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust before fees and expenses, subject to a 13.82% upside cap, while buffering the first 15% of losses during the July 20, 2026–July 16, 2027 target outcome period.

PSMR The Fund seeks to match the returns of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust up to a predetermined cap while providing a downside buffer over an approximately one-year period.

Why people hold it

  • GJUL The first 15% of the reference ETF's price loss over each outcome period is absorbed by the option structure, not by a manager's judgment call.
  • Twelve month-stamped siblings run the same 15% recipe, so the calendar start is your choice. This one resets in July.
  • The reference is the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, so the only moving parts are the buffer and the cap. No sector tilts, no stock picking.
  • PSMR Charges 0.49% a year against a 0.79% median in its buffered-SPY cohort, and undercuts Pacer's own single-month siblings like PJUL and POCT at 0.79%.
  • The contract is spelled out: a 15-point buffer against SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust losses over roughly a one-year period, with upside capped at a level set when the period begins.paceretfs.com
  • Terms reset on April 1 each year, so the new buffer and cap arrive on a known calendar date instead of whenever you happened to buy in.paceretfs.com
  • Running since 2021, so this April series has cycled through several complete outcome periods rather than being a fresh launch with a paper track record.

Worth knowing

  • GJUL At 0.85%, it runs above the buffer-cohort median of 0.79%. Laddered peers like BUFF charge 0.10% and spread start dates for you.
  • Buffer and cap apply to the full outcome period. Buy or sell partway through and you own part of a buffer and part of a cap, priced by the options.
  • It targets price return, so S&P 500 dividends are not part of the package.
  • PSMR Thinly traded next to the biggest names in buffer land, so spreads and order size are worth a look before you place a trade.
  • The cap cuts both ways: big SPY years get trimmed, and the stated buffer and cap only line up in full for a holder who rides one April reset to the next.
  • Not an income vehicle. It has not been paying a regular distribution, so whatever the strategy delivers shows up in the share price.

Full GJUL profile⁠

Full PSMR profile⁠

GJUL vs PSMR 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.

GJUL vs PSMR Cost

Overpaying GJUL vs PSMR

$6,407

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

  • GJUL 0.85%

    $16,199

  • PSMR 0.49%

    $9,792

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • GJUL 0.85%
  • PSMR 0.49%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530GJUL $16,199PSMR $9,792

Year by year

YearGJULPSMROverpaying
10$1,508$883$625
20$5,706$3,394$2,312
30$16,199$9,792$6,407

Expense ratio

  • 0.85%GJUL
  • 0.49%PSMR, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
  • Median 0.79%

PSMR 5th cheapest of 51 funds

GJUL 37th cheapest of 51 funds

GJUL vs PSMR Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 9, 2026
Payout (12M)
GJUL None
PSMR None

Distribution history

GJULAll GJUL payments⁠

No distribution history available.

PSMRAll PSMR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

GJUL vs PSMR Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
GJUL 6.0%PSMR 6.0%Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
GJUL 1.55, betterPSMR 1.31
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
GJUL −10.7%since Jul 2023PSMR −11.8%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
GJUL 0.48PSMR 0.46

Popular comparisons

  • GJULCvsPSMOB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PSMRBvsPSMOB

    Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GJULCvsPSMJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • PSMRBvsPSMJB

    Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GJULCvsBUFCB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July · AB Conservative Buffer ETF

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

    Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF · AB Conservative Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.49% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.