DAUG vs GJUL

DAUG vs GJUL

Which is better, DAUG or GJUL?

GJUL has been ahead.

GJUL led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97.

Lower Fees: TiedHigher Returns: GJUL

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

MetricDAUGGJUL
Expense Ratio0.85%Tie0.85%Tie
AUM$446M$415M
Dividend Yield0.00%0.00%
Holdings1010
YTD Return+7.66%+8.24%Best
1Y Return+9.87%+10.73%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+12.57%+13.93%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+6.73%-
Volatility (annualized)6.7%6.3%Best
Max Drawdown-10.5%Best-10.7%
$10,000 over 3.2 years$13,721$14,450Best
Fund FamilyFirst Trust Portfolios (US)First Trust Portfolios (US)
CategoryAlternativeAlternative
StyleMulti AlternativeMulti Alternative
InceptionNov 6, 2019Jul 21, 2023

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 24, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.2 years).

DAUG vs GJUL 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 3.2 years both funds cover.

Compare DAUG against instead:DAUG vs SPYDAUG vs QQQDAUG vs VOODAUG vs VTIGJUL against:GJUL vs VXUS

DAUG vs GJUL Performance

FT Vest US Equity Deep Buffer ETF - August (DAUG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July (GJUL) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year DAUG returned +9.87% while GJUL returned +10.73%. Year to date, DAUG is up 7.66% versus a gain of 8.24% for GJUL.

Over three years, DAUG compounded at +12.57% per year against +13.93% for GJUL.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

DAUG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.7% compared with 6.3% for GJUL. 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 -10.5% for DAUG and -10.7% for GJUL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

DAUG charges 0.85% per year while GJUL charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $85 annually. On income, DAUG currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for GJUL.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of DAUG and GJUL you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

DAUGGJUL

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, DAUG or GJUL?

DAUG has an expense ratio of 0.85% while GJUL charges 0.85%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.

Which performed better, DAUG or GJUL?

Over the past year DAUG returned +9.87% vs +10.73% for GJUL, so GJUL leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, DAUG or GJUL?

DAUG has been the more volatile fund at 6.7% annualized versus 6.3% for GJUL. Worst drawdown: DAUG -10.5% vs GJUL -10.7%.

Should I hold both DAUG and GJUL?

DAUG and GJUL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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, DAUG or GJUL?

DAUG yields 0.00% while GJUL yields 0.00%, so GJUL currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is GJUL better than DAUG?

GJUL led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.