GJAN vs SQMX
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - January vs FT Vest US Equity Quarterly Max Buffer ETF
Which is better, GJAN or SQMX?
GJAN has been ahead.
GJAN led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92.
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 | GJAN | SQMX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85%Tie | 0.85%Tie |
| AUM | $443M | $55M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 10 | 10 |
| YTD Return | +8.05%Best | +4.77% |
| 1Y Return | +11.35%Best | +7.41% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.30% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.0% | 2.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -10.6% | -7.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $11,981Best | $11,346 |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Jan 20, 2023 | Dec 20, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 23, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
GJAN vs SQMX 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
GJAN vs SQMX Performance
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - January (GJAN) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and FT Vest US Equity Quarterly Max Buffer ETF (SQMX) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year GJAN returned +11.35% while SQMX returned +7.41%. Year to date, GJAN is up 8.05% versus a gain of 4.77% for SQMX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GJAN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.0% compared with 2.8% for SQMX. 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 -10.6% for GJAN and -7.4% for SQMX. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GJAN charges 0.85% per year while SQMX charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $85 annually. On income, GJAN currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for SQMX.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of GJAN and SQMX 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, GJAN or SQMX?
GJAN has an expense ratio of 0.85% while SQMX charges 0.85%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.
Which performed better, GJAN or SQMX?
Over the past year GJAN returned +11.35% vs +7.41% for SQMX, so GJAN leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GJAN annualized +10.56% vs +7.27% for SQMX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GJAN or SQMX?
GJAN has been the more volatile fund at 6.0% annualized versus 2.8% for SQMX. Worst drawdown: GJAN -10.6% vs SQMX -7.4%.
Should I hold both GJAN and SQMX?
GJAN and SQMX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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, GJAN or SQMX?
GJAN yields 0.00% while SQMX yields 0.00%, so SQMX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SQMX better than GJAN?
GJAN led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.