ACII vs ZJUN
Innovator Index Autocallable Income Strategy ETF vs Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr June
Which is better, ACII or ZJUN?
ACII has been ahead.
ACII led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACII | ZJUN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79%Tie | 0.79%Tie |
| AUM | $147M | $153M |
| Dividend Yield | 8.44% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 18 | 21 |
| YTD Return | +7.34%Best | +3.53% |
| 1Y Return | +10.33%Best | +4.82% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.7% | 1.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -2.3% | -1.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.1 years | $11,005Best | $10,535 |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Option Writing | Option Writing |
| Inception | Sep 24, 2025 | Jun 2, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 25, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.1 years).
ACII vs ZJUN growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.1 years both funds cover.
ACII vs ZJUN Performance
Innovator Index Autocallable Income Strategy ETF (ACII) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr June (ZJUN) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year ACII returned +10.33% while ZJUN returned +4.82%. Year to date, ACII is up 7.34% versus a gain of 3.53% for ZJUN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACII has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 3.7% compared with 1.5% for ZJUN. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -2.3% for ACII and -1.1% for ZJUN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACII charges 0.79% per year while ZJUN charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $79 annually. On income, ACII currently yields 8.44% against 0.00% for ZJUN.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ACII and ZJUN you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACII or ZJUN?
ACII has an expense ratio of 0.79% while ZJUN charges 0.79%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.
Which performed better, ACII or ZJUN?
Over the past year ACII returned +10.33% vs +4.82% for ZJUN, so ACII leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), ACII annualized +9.10% vs +4.85% for ZJUN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACII or ZJUN?
ACII has been the more volatile fund at 3.7% annualized versus 1.5% for ZJUN. Worst drawdown: ACII -2.3% vs ZJUN -1.1%.
Should I hold both ACII and ZJUN?
ACII and ZJUN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACII or ZJUN?
ACII yields 8.44% while ZJUN yields 0.00%, so ACII currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZJUN better than ACII?
ACII led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.