Skip to content
etf.net

SIXJ vs TENJ

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

SIXJBCboe

iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

TENJBCboe

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

TENJ −0.21pt a year

SIXJ0.74%TENJ0.53%

Avg volume · 30D

TENJ 1.6×the volume

SIXJ15.1KTENJ24.6K

SIXJ vs TENJ Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+10.5%SIXJ+11.7%TENJ

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. SIXJ +10.5%. TENJ +11.7%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%5%15%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
SIXJ 0.74%
TENJ 0.53%, better
Fund size
SIXJ $149M
TENJ $47M
1Y total return
SIXJ +10.5%
TENJ +11.7%, better
Holdings
SIXJ 3
TENJ 4
Avg volume (30D)
SIXJ 15.1K sh
TENJ 24.6K sh, better
NAV per share
SIXJ $37.56
TENJ $28.09
52W range

ETF.net Grade

SIXJ: Cost 68, Risk 67, Mission not scored, Tradability 70, Holdings 53, Durability 57. TENJ: Cost 86, Risk 49, Mission not scored, Tradability 66, Holdings 51, Durability 41.
Pillar letters and Scores for SIXJ, TENJ, with each pillar’s weight
PillarSIXJTENJ
Cost30% weightB68A86Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightB67HigherC49
Tradability15% weightA70HigherB66
Holdings10% weightC53HigherC51
Durability5% weightB57HigherC41

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

How we build Categories ›
Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. SIXJ and TENJ 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 ›

TENJ ranks 3rd and SIXJ 4th 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

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

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

TENJBiShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun 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.

TENJ No data

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.

TENJ No data

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.

TENJ No data

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.

TENJ No data

Full SIXJ profile⁠

Full TENJ profile⁠

SIXJ vs TENJ Holdings

How SIXJ and TENJ differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of SIXJ and 0.0% of TENJ.

Level by level

  • Holdings0 in both0.0%
  • Asset classEquity100%
  • Countryby domicile100%

Sector

No Sector split for TENJ.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in SIXJ and TENJ, widest gap first
CountryMore in SIXJMore in TENJ
United StatesTENJ +0.1 points
SwitzerlandSame weight
ChinaSame weight
MexicoSIXJ +0.1 points
IrelandSame weight
United KingdomSame weight

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • SIXJ100.8%
  • TENJ102.6%

Securities held

  • SIXJ2
  • TENJ2

Asset class

SIXJ
Equity
TENJ
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in SIXJ2
  • In both0
  • Only in TENJ2

Only in SIXJ

2 securities, 100% of SIXJ by weight

  • Spy 12/31/2026 5.53 C99.26%
  • Spy 12/31/2026 746.70 P1.26%

Only in TENJ

2 securities, 100% of TENJ by weight

  • Ishares Core S&P Etf Trust97.64%
  • JUL27 Ivv Us P @ 748.894.03%

Weight gaps

SIXJ and TENJ share no securities.

All 5 SIXJ holdings⁠All TENJ 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 TENJ Cost

Overpaying SIXJ vs TENJ

$3,771

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

  • SIXJ 0.74%

    $14,307

  • TENJ 0.53%

    $10,536

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • SIXJ 0.74%
  • TENJ 0.53%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530SIXJ $14,307TENJ $10,536

Year by year

YearSIXJTENJOverpaying
10$1,319$953$366
20$5,015$3,658$1,357
30$14,307$10,536$3,771

Expense ratio

  • 0.74%SIXJ
  • 0.53%TENJ, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

TENJ 11th cheapest of 77 funds

SIXJ 17th cheapest of 77 funds

SIXJ vs TENJ Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
SIXJ None
TENJ No data
Last payment
SIXJ No data
TENJ $0.07
Ex-dividend
SIXJ No data
TENJ Dec 23, 2025
Paid on
SIXJ No data
TENJ Dec 29, 2025
Frequency
SIXJ No data
TENJ Irregular

Distribution history

Per share, 2025 to 2026, same scale for both

SIXJAll SIXJ payments⁠

No distribution history available.

TENJIrregular · 1 paymentAll TENJ payments⁠
One bar per payment. 1 payment from 2025 to 2026 YTD. Dec 23, 2025 $0.07. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.052026YTD

SIXJ vs TENJ 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%TENJ 8.6%since Nov 2025
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
SIXJ 1.67TENJ 0.90since Nov 2025
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
SIXJ −14.1%since Jan 2022TENJ −5.5%since Oct 2025
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
SIXJ 0.46TENJ 0.63

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.

  • TENJBvsZALTA

    iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

    Expense ratio
    0.53% · 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.

  • TENJBvsAUGPB

    iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.53% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • SIXJBvsBUFMB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF · AB Moderate Buffer ETF

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

  • TENJBvsBUFMB

    iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF · AB Moderate Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.53% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.