Skip to content

SIXJ vs SIXP

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

SIXJBCboe

AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep ETF

SIXPBCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.

SIXJ0.74%SIXP0.74%

Avg volume · 30D

SIXJ 3.9×the volume

SIXJ15.1KSIXP3.84K

SIXJ vs SIXP Performance

Nov 7, 2025 – Nov 9, 2026

+10.7%SIXJ+11.2%SIXP

Nov 7, 2025 to Nov 9, 2026. SIXJ +10.7%. SIXP +11.2%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2.5%5%7.5%Nov 2025May 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
SIXJ 0.74%
SIXP 0.74%
Fund size
SIXJ $146M
SIXP $215M
1Y total return
SIXJ +10.7%
SIXP +11.2%, better
Holdings
SIXJ 3
SIXP 3
Avg volume (30D)
SIXJ 15.1K sh, better
SIXP 3.84K sh
NAV per share
SIXJ $36.56
SIXP $33.88
52W range

ETF.net Grade

SIXJ: Cost 68, Risk 72, Mission not scored, Tradability 72, Holdings 53, Durability 57. SIXP: Cost 68, Risk 64, Mission not scored, Tradability 35, Holdings 56, Durability 56.
Pillar letters and Scores for SIXJ, SIXP, with each pillar’s weight
PillarSIXJSIXP
Cost30% weightB68B68
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightA72HigherB64
Tradability15% weightA72HigherD35
Holdings10% weightC53B56Higher
Durability5% weightB57HigherB56

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. SIXJ and SIXP 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 2nd and SIXP 18th of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.

  1. Rank 1AZALTInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - QuarterlyScore 76
  2. Rank 2BAUGPPGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - AugustScore 66
  3. Rank 2BSIXJAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETFScore 66
  4. Rank 4BJANPPGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - JanuaryScore 65
  5. Rank 18BJULTAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Jul ETFScore 58
  6. Rank 18BSIXPAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep ETFScore 58
  7. Rank 22BBOCTInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETFScore 57

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

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

SIXPBAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep ETF

In short

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.

SIXP Ten percent of the downside absorbed, the upside capped, and the whole deal re-struck every six months instead of once a year. SIXP is the March/September dial in AllianzIM's semiannual buffer lineup.

Stated mandate

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.

SIXP The Fund is designed to match the share-price return of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust at the end of each six-month Outcome Period, subject to an upside Cap. It also seeks to absorb the first 10% of the reference ETF’s losses.

Why people hold 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.
  • SIXP Absorbs the first 10% of the reference S&P 500 ETF's decline over each six-month outcome period, with the upside capped.
  • Resets twice a year, in March and September, so the cap is re-struck against fresher pricing more often than in a standard 12-month buffer fund.
  • 0.74% a year, a shade under the typical fee among shallow-buffer funds.
  • A 1940 Act fund holding its own options package rather than a bank note, and it sits in the upper half of a crowded shallow-buffer field.

Worth knowing

  • 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.
  • SIXP The cap is the price of the cushion, and each new cap is set at the reset, moving with volatility and rates. Enter mid-period and your cushion and ceiling differ from the stated terms.
  • It targets the reference ETF's share-price return, so dividends aren't part of the deal, and this fund hasn't been paying distributions.
  • A small, lightly traded fund next to the biggest buffer names, so spreads can be wider.

Full SIXJ profile⁠

Full SIXP profile⁠

SIXJ vs SIXP 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.

SIXJ vs SIXP Cost

Same expense ratio

$14,307

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

  • SIXJ 0.74%

    $14,307

  • SIXP 0.74%

    $14,307

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • SIXJ 0.74%
  • SIXP 0.74%
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530SIXJ $14,307SIXP $14,307

Year by year

YearSIXJSIXP
10$1,319$1,319
20$5,015$5,015
30$14,307$14,307

Expense ratio

  • 0.74%SIXJ
  • 0.74%SIXP
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

SIXJ 17th cheapest of 77 funds

SIXP 17th cheapest of 77 funds

SIXJ vs SIXP Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 9, 2026
Payout (12M)
SIXJ None
SIXP None

Distribution history

SIXJAll SIXJ payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SIXPAll SIXP payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SIXJ vs SIXP Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
SIXJ 5.9%SIXP 6.0%since Apr 2024
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
SIXJ 1.67SIXP 1.27since Apr 2024
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
SIXJ −14.1%since Jan 2022SIXP −11.3%since Mar 2024
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
SIXJ 0.46SIXP 0.48

Popular comparisons

  • 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.
  • SIXPBvsZALTA

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep 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.
  • 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.
  • SIXPBvsAUGPB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep 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.
  • SIXJBvsJANPB

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

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

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Mar/Sep ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - January

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