Data as of Nov 3, 2026.
CJUL vs JULC: Cap, Buffer & Days Left
As of Nov 3, 2026 CJUL can fall 1.1% before its buffer engages and JULC 1.1%.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CJUL and JULCNet assets on Nov 4, 2026: $1.0m for Corgi U.S. Equities 15% Structured Buffer ETF - July Series and $1.2m for Corgi U.S. Equities 10% Structured Buffer ETF - July Series.
CJUL: reference +1.2% since period start, fund +2.1%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +14.0%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.
CJUL: reference +1.2% since period start, fund +2.1%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +14.0%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.JULC: reference +1.2% since period start, fund +1.9%; buffer 0 to −10; cap +18.2%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.
JULC: reference +1.2% since period start, fund +1.9%; buffer 0 to −10; cap +18.2%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.Pair scorecard
Both cost 0.30% a year; JULC is 1.2 times larger.
Points (pts) are percentage points.
| Measure | CJUL | JULC |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | SPY | SPY |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.30% | 0.30% |
| Net assets, as of Nov 4, 2026 | $1.0m | $1.2m |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | not published | |
How much of a bear-market fall the buffer would absorb from today's level, ranked against 292 buffer ETFs on stocks with a live outcome period. 100 is best. How it is computed
Today's position against one 20% fall; it ignores smaller falls, and stock buffers are never ranked against bond or commodity ones. All buffer ETFs ranked by it →
Window by window
| Total return | Gap to the reference's price return | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | CJUL | JULC | CJUL | JULC |
| 3 months | +0.7% | +0.2% | +1.1 pts | +0.6 pts |
| Since launchCJUL Jul 2026 · JULC Jul 2026 | +2.8% | +2.8% | −0.1 pts | −0.1 pts |
Each fund's gap is to its reference's price return, dividends left out: the basis the outcome period uses. Open this comparison in the app →
Side by side
As of Nov 3, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
Both are Corgi funds, so the difference between them is the terms rather than the house.
Where each one stands today
CJUL resets first, on Jun 30, 2027, 239 days from now; JULC runs to Jun 30, 2027, 239 days. A fall from here reaches CJUL’s buffer after 1.1% and JULC’s after 1.1%. Both track SPY, so what separates them is where each is in its own period.
CJUL
The fund's price can fall 1.1% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's number. In index terms, SPY can fall 1.1% from today's level to the point where the buffer begins. Protection left, in index points: 15.0% of the 15.0% buffer still sits below today's SPY level. 239 days remained on Nov 3, 2026. On Jun 30, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
JULC
Protection left, in index points: 10.0% of the 10.0% buffer still sits below today's SPY level.
Questions people ask
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
It is a place in a set, not a rating or a recommendation.
ETFIQ calculates every number from each issuer’s published outcome-period terms. Buffer ETFs hold options on an index, not shares, so there is no holdings overlap to report.
Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, CJUL against JULC, data as of Nov 3, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cjul-vs-julc
ETFIQ. (Nov 3, 2026). CJUL against JULC. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cjul-vs-julc
[CJUL against JULC (ETFIQ, Nov 3, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cjul-vs-julc)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.