AUGT vs. OCTW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AUGT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF) and OCTW (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AUGT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while OCTW is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust. AUGT is actively managed, while OCTW is passively managed. Over the past year, AUGT returned 19.40% vs 12.57% for OCTW. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

AUGT vs. OCTW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGT achieves a 6.41% return, which is significantly higher than OCTW's 4.72% return.

AUGT

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.96%
• YTD: 6.41%
• 6M: 6.99%
• 1Y: 19.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

OCTW

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 1.52%
• YTD: 4.72%
• 6M: 5.16%
• 1Y: 12.57%
• 3Y*: 10.88%
• 5Y*: 8.86%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUGT vs. OCTW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AUGT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF	6.41%	14.64%	19.69%	3.94%
OCTW AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF	4.72%	9.68%	8.67%	6.82%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGT and OCTW is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2023	0.88

The correlation between AUGT and OCTW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUGT vs. OCTW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AUGT	OCTW
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

AUGT vs. OCTW — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AUGT

AUGT Risk / Return Rank: 83
AUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
AUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
AUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
AUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
AUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

OCTW

OCTW Risk / Return Rank: 82
OCTW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
OCTW Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
OCTW Omega Ratio Rank: 88
OCTW Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
OCTW Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AUGT vs. OCTW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	AUGT	OCTW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.57	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.81	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.53	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	3.45	+0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.88	17.79	+1.10
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUGT vs. OCTW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGT Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the OCTW Sharpe Ratio of 2.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGT and OCTW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AUGT	OCTW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.57	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.56	1.48	+0.08

Drawdowns

AUGT vs. OCTW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGT drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, which is greater than OCTW's maximum drawdown of -8.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGT and OCTW.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUGT	OCTW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.12%	-8.38%	-4.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.36%	-3.65%	-1.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-8.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-8.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.05%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.22%	-0.82%	-0.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	0.71%	+0.32%

Volatility

AUGT vs. OCTW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) is 0.68%, while AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Oct ETF (OCTW) has a volatility of 0.72%. This indicates that AUGT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than OCTW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUGT	OCTW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.68%	0.72%	-0.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.50%	3.80%	+1.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.48%	4.91%	+2.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.18%	6.29%	+3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.18%	6.14%	+4.04%

AUGT vs. OCTW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AUGT and OCTW have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

AUGT vs. OCTW - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUGT nor OCTW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUGT and OCTW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, AUGT and OCTW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, AUGT or OCTW?

OCTW has higher volatility (0.72%) compared to AUGT (0.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGT dropped -13.12% vs OCTW's -8.38%.

Which ETF is better, AUGT or OCTW?

On 1-year performance, AUGT leads with 19.40% vs 12.57% for OCTW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUGT or OCTW?

Over the 1-year period, AUGT has performed better with a 19.40% return vs 12.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUGT or OCTW?

AUGT and OCTW have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUGT or OCTW?

AUGT and OCTW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AUGT and OCTW?

AUGT is categorized as Options Trading, while OCTW is Defined Outcome.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.57), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.