DJAN vs XAUG

DJAN vs XAUG

Which is better, DJAN or XAUG?

DJAN has been ahead.

DJAN led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93.

Lower Fees: TiedHigher Returns: DJAN

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

MetricDJANXAUG
Expense Ratio0.85%Tie0.85%Tie
AUM$455M$26M
Dividend Yield0.00%0.00%
Holdings1012
YTD Return+7.90%Best+6.36%
1Y Return+11.42%Best+8.57%
3Y Return (annualized)+12.54%Best+9.93%
5Y Return (annualized)+7.97%-
Volatility (annualized)6.3%4.3%Best
Max Drawdown-9.3%-8.7%Best
$10,000 over 3.1 years$14,272Best$13,294
Fund FamilyFirst Trust Portfolios (US)First Trust Portfolios (US)
CategoryAlternativeAlternative
StyleMulti AlternativeMulti Alternative
InceptionJan 15, 2021Aug 18, 2023

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 21, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.1 years).

DJAN vs XAUG 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 3.1 years both funds cover.

Compare DJAN against instead:DJAN vs SPYDJAN vs QQQDJAN vs VOODJAN vs VTIXAUG against:XAUG vs VXUS

DJAN vs XAUG Performance

FT Vest US Equity Deep Buffer ETF - January (DJAN) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and FT Vest US Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - August (XAUG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year DJAN returned +11.42% while XAUG returned +8.57%. Year to date, DJAN is up 7.90% versus a gain of 6.36% for XAUG.

Over three years, DJAN compounded at +12.54% per year against +9.93% for XAUG.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

DJAN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.3% compared with 4.3% for XAUG. 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 -9.3% for DJAN and -8.7% for XAUG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

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

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

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

DJANXAUG

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, DJAN or XAUG?

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

Which performed better, DJAN or XAUG?

Over the past year DJAN returned +11.42% vs +8.57% for XAUG, so DJAN leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, DJAN or XAUG?

DJAN has been the more volatile fund at 6.3% annualized versus 4.3% for XAUG. Worst drawdown: DJAN -9.3% vs XAUG -8.7%.

Should I hold both DJAN and XAUG?

DJAN and XAUG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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, DJAN or XAUG?

DJAN yields 0.00% while XAUG yields 0.00%, so XAUG currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is XAUG better than DJAN?

DJAN led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.