AUGW vs. QBER

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

AUGW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF) and QBER (TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AUGW returned 10.66% vs -0.73% for QBER. Their -0.48 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. AUGW charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QBER.

Performance

AUGW vs. QBER - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) and TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGW achieves a 5.40% return, which is significantly higher than QBER's -0.52% return.

AUGW

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: 4.83%
• YTD: 5.40%
• 1Y: 10.66%
• 3Y*: 11.08%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.12%

QBER

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 0.02%
• YTD: -0.52%
• 1Y: -0.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -0.11%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AUGW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF	$761.06K	$423.78K	$328.81K
QBER TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF	$350.41K	$265.27K	$646.25K

AUGW vs. QBER - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AUGW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF	5.40%	11.19%	4.84%
QBER TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF	-0.52%	0.25%	0.04%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGW and QBER is -0.55, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024	-0.48

The correlation between AUGW and QBER has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.55 to -0.48 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AUGW vs. QBER — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AUGW

AUGW Risk / Return Rank: 90
AUGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
AUGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
AUGW Omega Ratio Rank: 93
AUGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
AUGW Martin Ratio Rank: 93

QBER

QBER Risk / Return Rank: 9
QBER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
QBER Sortino Ratio Rank: 8
QBER Omega Ratio Rank: 9
QBER Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
QBER Martin Ratio Rank: 10

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AUGW vs. QBER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) and TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AUGW	QBER	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	-0.07	+2.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.40	-0.07	+3.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	0.99	+0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	-0.11	+3.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.10	-0.21	+17.31

AUGW vs. QBER - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGW Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is higher than the QBER Sharpe Ratio of -0.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGW and QBER, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AUGW vs. QBER - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGW drawdown since its inception was -8.76%, which is greater than QBER's maximum drawdown of -5.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGW and QBER.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUGW	QBER	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.76%	-5.72%	-3.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.20%	-2.35%	-0.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-5.27%	+5.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.70%	-4.75%	+4.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.59%	1.21%	-0.62%

Volatility

AUGW vs. QBER - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) is 0.32%, while TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) has a volatility of 1.15%. This indicates that AUGW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QBER based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUGW	QBER	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	1.15%	-0.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.24%	2.93%	+0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.43%	3.87%	+0.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.60%	6.24%	+0.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.60%	6.24%	+0.36%

AUGW vs. QBER - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUGW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than QBER's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUGW vs. QBER - Dividend Comparison

AUGW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QBER's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.28%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AUGW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QBER TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF	3.28%	3.26%	1.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUGW and QBER in my portfolio?

AUGW and QBER have a correlation of -0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AUGW or QBER?

QBER has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to AUGW (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGW dropped -8.76% vs QBER's -5.72%.

Which ETF is better, AUGW or QBER?

On 1-year performance, AUGW leads with 10.66% vs -0.73% for QBER. On fees, AUGW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, AUGW has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUGW or QBER?

Over the 1-year period, AUGW has performed better with a 10.66% return vs -0.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUGW or QBER?

AUGW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBER.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUGW or QBER?

QBER has the higher dividend yield at 3.28%, compared with 0.00% for AUGW.

What is the main difference between AUGW and QBER?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for AUGW and 0.79% for QBER.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs -0.07), 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.