JANZ vs LJUL
TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF vs Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - July
Which is better, JANZ or LJUL?
JANZ has been ahead.
LJUL has a lower expense ratio. JANZ led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | JANZ | LJUL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.79%Best |
| AUM | $42M | $9M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.30% | 5.23% |
| Holdings | 32 | 39 |
| YTD Return | +9.88%Best | -0.15% |
| 1Y Return | +10.64%Best | +0.85% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.48% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.90% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.2% | 1.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -14.3% | -3.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.3 years | $12,917Best | $10,884 |
| Fund Family | TrueShares | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 31, 2020 | Jul 1, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 1, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.3 years).
JANZ vs LJUL 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 2.3 years both funds cover.
JANZ vs LJUL Performance
TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF (JANZ) is an ETF from TrueShares and Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - July (LJUL) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year JANZ returned +10.64% while LJUL returned +0.85%. Year to date, JANZ is up 9.88% versus a loss of 0.15% for LJUL.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JANZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 9.2% compared with 1.2% for LJUL. 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 -14.3% for JANZ and -3.2% for LJUL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.46. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JANZ charges 0.80% per year while LJUL charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $80 vs $79 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JANZ currently yields 1.30% against 5.23% for LJUL.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of JANZ and LJUL 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, JANZ or LJUL?
JANZ has an expense ratio of 0.80% while LJUL charges 0.79%. LJUL is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JANZ or LJUL?
Over the past year JANZ returned +10.64% vs +0.85% for LJUL, so JANZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), JANZ annualized +11.77% vs +3.75% for LJUL. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JANZ or LJUL?
JANZ has been the more volatile fund at 9.2% annualized versus 1.2% for LJUL. Worst drawdown: JANZ -14.3% vs LJUL -3.2%.
Should I hold both JANZ and LJUL?
JANZ and LJUL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.46, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, JANZ or LJUL?
JANZ yields 1.30% while LJUL yields 5.23%, so LJUL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LJUL better than JANZ?
LJUL has a lower expense ratio. JANZ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.