CPSA vs GJUL: Cap, Buffer & Days Left
As of Oct 9, 2026 GJUL can fall 3.9% before its buffer engages and CPSA 1.3%, and GJUL resets 14 days sooner. Net assets on Oct 9, 2026: $50m for Calamos S&P 500 ® Structured Alt Protection ETF - August and $415m for FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July.
CPSA costs 0.16 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 4.8 points; GJUL is 8.4 times larger.
| CPSA | GJUL | |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.69% | 0.85% |
| Net assets | $50m | $415m |
| Total return, 1 year | +5.9% | +10.7% |
| What it tracks | SPY | SPY |
| Holdings in common | not published | |
| Index fall to the buffer | 2.7% | 4.5% |
CPSA: reference +2.8% since period start, fund +1.2%; buffer Floor; cap +7.8%; Full floor. Figures to Oct 9, 2026.
Figures to Oct 9, 2026.
GJUL: reference +4.8% since period start, fund +3.1%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +13.8%; Between buffer and cap. Figures to Oct 9, 2026.
GJUL: reference +4.8% since period start, fund +3.1%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +13.8%; Between buffer and cap. Figures to Oct 9, 2026.
These are two different products. CPSA is a floor fund, which caps how far a holder can fall. GJUL is a buffer fund, which absorbs the first part of a fall and leaves everything below it with the holder.
Where each one stands today
GJUL resets first, on Jul 16, 2027, 280 days from now; CPSA runs to Jul 30, 2027, 294 days. A fall from here reaches CPSA’s buffer after 1.3% and GJUL’s after 3.9%. Both track SPY, so what separates them is where each is in its own period.
Performance, window by window
| Total return | Gap to the reference's price return | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | CPSA | GJUL | CPSA | GJUL |
| 3 months | +1.5% | +3.2% | −1.6 pts | 0.0 pts |
| 6 months | +3.8% | +7.7% | −10.8 pts | −6.9 pts |
| 1 year | +5.9% | +10.7% | −10.1 pts | −5.3 pts |
| 3 years | not published | +48.8% | not published | −30.4 pts |
Each fund's gap is to its reference's price return, dividends left out: the basis the outcome period uses. Source: ETFIQ. Open the live comparison on ETFIQ →
On the same fields
As of Oct 9, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CPSA in plain words
The fund's price can fall 1.3% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's figure. In index terms, SPY can fall 2.7% 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. 294 days remained on Oct 9, 2026. On Jul 30, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
GJUL in plain words
From its price on Oct 9, 2026, the fund can gain about 9.5% more before it reaches its cap. The fund's price can fall 3.9% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's figure. In index terms, SPY can fall 4.5% 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. 280 days remained on Oct 9, 2026. On Jul 16, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
Questions people ask
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
ETFIQ calculates every figure 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 figure is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.
ETFIQ, CPSA against GJUL, data as of Oct 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cpsa-vs-gjul
ETFIQ. (Oct 9, 2026). CPSA against GJUL. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cpsa-vs-gjul
[CPSA against GJUL (ETFIQ, Oct 9, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cpsa-vs-gjul)
Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.