Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
SPLG vs ZJUN: how they differ
SPLG and ZJUN are funds of different kinds, on the fields both publish.
S&P 500, book from IVV and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr June.
| SPLG S&P 500, book from IVV | ZJUN Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr June | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Buffer ETF |
| Issuer | S&P | Innovator |
| What it is | S&P 500, book from IVV | Defined outcome, 100% on SPY |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.6% | not published |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | not published |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +0.1 pts | not available |
| Expense ratio | not published | 0.79% |
SPLG in plain words
SPLG is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100.
ZJUN in plain words
From its price on Sep 12, 2026, the fund can gain about 6.8% more before it reaches its cap. The fund's price can fall 1.2% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's figure. In index terms, SPY can fall 1.0% from today's level to the point where the buffer begins. Protection left, in index points: 100.0% of the 100.0% buffer still sits below today's SPY level. 262 days remained on Sep 12, 2026. On May 31, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
Questions people ask
- Are SPLG and ZJUN the same kind of fund?
- No. SPLG is an index ETF and ZJUN is a buffer ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, SPLG against ZJUN, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/SPLG-ZJUN Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources