FJAN vs TSLT
FT Vest US Equity Buffer ETF - January vs T-Rex 2X Long Tesla Daily Target ETF
Which is better, FJAN or TSLT?
FJAN has been ahead.
FJAN has a lower expense ratio. FJAN led over 1Y, 3Y 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 | FJAN | TSLT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85%Best | 1.05% |
| AUM | $1.5B | $142M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 10 | 22 |
| YTD Return | +10.53%Best | -44.65% |
| 1Y Return | +14.36%Best | -48.17% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.58%Best | -11.93% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.46% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.6%Best | 104.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.9%Best | -83.2% |
| $10,000 over 3 years | $15,743Best | $6,831 |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | REX Shares |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Jan 15, 2021 | Oct 19, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 19, 2023 to Oct 13, 2026 (3 years).
FJAN vs TSLT 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 3 years both funds cover.
FJAN vs TSLT Performance
FT Vest US Equity Buffer ETF - January (FJAN) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and T-Rex 2X Long Tesla Daily Target ETF (TSLT) is an ETF from REX Shares. Over the past year FJAN returned +14.36% while TSLT returned -48.17%. Year to date, FJAN is up 10.53% versus a loss of 44.65% for TSLT.
Over three years, FJAN compounded at +15.58% per year against -11.93% for TSLT.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TSLT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 104.7% compared with 7.6% for FJAN. 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 -12.9% for FJAN and -83.2% for TSLT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.39. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FJAN charges 0.85% per year while TSLT charges 1.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $105 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FJAN currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for TSLT.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FJAN and TSLT 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, FJAN or TSLT?
FJAN has an expense ratio of 0.85% while TSLT charges 1.05%. FJAN is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FJAN or TSLT?
Over the past year FJAN returned +14.36% vs -48.17% for TSLT, so FJAN leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FJAN or TSLT?
TSLT has been the more volatile fund at 104.7% annualized versus 7.6% for FJAN. Worst drawdown: FJAN -12.9% vs TSLT -83.2%.
Should I hold both FJAN and TSLT?
FJAN and TSLT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.39, 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, FJAN or TSLT?
FJAN yields 0.00% while TSLT yields 0.00%, so TSLT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TSLT better than FJAN?
FJAN has a lower expense ratio. FJAN led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.