Data as of .
FDND vs LJUL: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year FDND paid 7.1% of its price in cash against LJUL’s 5.2%, though LJUL returned more with it reinvested.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: LJUL scores higher
Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?
A percentile among the 173 income ETFs writing on an index or proxy. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All income ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, FDND and LJUL hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Only in FDND | Only in LJUL |
|---|---|
| Meta Platforms, Inc. (Class A) 10.12% | TREASURY BILL 99.57% |
| Amazon.com, Inc. 9.98% | TREASURY BILL 0.43% |
| Cisco Systems, Inc. 8.66% | |
| Netflix, Inc. 5.90% | |
| Alphabet Inc. (Class A) 5.82% | |
| Alphabet Inc. (Class C) 4.65% | |
| Arista Networks, Inc. 4.62% | |
| Salesforce, Inc. 4.36% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and Sep 18, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FDND | LJUL | FDND | LJUL | FDND | LJUL | |
| 3 months | +8.9% | +1.5% | 2.0% | 1.3% | +8.5 pts | −0.8 pts |
| 6 months | +18.8% | +3.1% | 4.3% | 2.6% | +4.8 pts | −14.9 pts |
| 1 year | −0.6% | +5.0% | 7.1% | 5.2% | −14.1 pts | −11.5 pts |
| Since launch | +34.3% | +13.2% | 20.4% | 11.7% | −0.5 pts | −30.2 pts |
| FDND FT Vest Dow Jones Internet & Target Income ETF Option income on DIA, paying monthly | LJUL Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - July Buffer with income on SPY, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | First Trust | Innovator |
| Strategy | option income | buffer with income |
| Benchmark | Dow Jones Industrial Average (DIA) | S&P 500 (SPY) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 7.8% | 5.3% |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.79% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 7.1% | 5.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | −8.2% | −0.3% |
| Total return, 1 year | −0.6% | +5.0% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +13.5% | +16.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −14.1 pts | −11.5 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 911 days | 809 days |
| Net assets | $10m | $9m |
FDND in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, FDND paid 7.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 8.2%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned −0.6%. Dow Jones Industrial Average (DIA) returned +13.5% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 14.1 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 7.8%, paid monthly.
LJUL in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, LJUL paid 5.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price fell 0.3%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +5.0%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.5 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.3%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, FDND or LJUL?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, FDND paid 7.1% of its starting price in cash and LJUL paid 5.2%, so FDND paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, FDND or LJUL?
- With every distribution reinvested, FDND returned −0.6% and LJUL returned +5.0% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so LJUL returned more.
- Which is cheaper, FDND or LJUL?
- FDND charges 0.75% a year and LJUL charges 0.79%, so FDND is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
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, FDND against LJUL, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/fdnd-vs-ljul Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.