PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AUGW vs. QBER
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGW achieves a 4.44% return, which is significantly higher than QBER's -0.50% return.


AUGW

1D
0.09%
1M
0.56%
YTD
4.44%
6M
4.48%
1Y
13.11%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QBER

1D
0.34%
1M
0.25%
YTD
-0.50%
6M
0.34%
1Y
-0.39%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AUGW vs. QBER - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
AUGW
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF
4.44%11.19%4.84%
QBER
TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF
-0.50%0.25%0.04%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGW and QBER is -0.55, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.55

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024

-0.49

The correlation between AUGW and QBER has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.55 to -0.49 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AUGW vs. QBER — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUGW
AUGW Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
AUGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUGW Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
AUGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUGW Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

QBER
QBER Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
QBER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBER Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBER Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
QBER Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBER Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


AUGWQBERDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+3.00

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+4.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

0.99

+0.63

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.12

-0.17

+4.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.35

-0.37

+22.73

AUGW vs. QBER - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGW Sharpe Ratio is 2.89, which is higher than the QBER Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AUGWQBERDifference

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%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.01%

-5.25%

+5.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.73%

-4.73%

+4.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.59%

1.05%

-0.46%

Volatility

AUGW vs. QBER - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) is 0.79%, while TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) has a volatility of 1.03%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AUGWQBERDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.79%

1.03%

-0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.42%

2.90%

+0.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.56%

3.69%

+0.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.72%

6.34%

+0.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.72%

6.34%

+0.38%

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%.


PositionTTM20252024
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


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.

QBER has higher volatility (1.03%) compared to AUGW (0.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGW dropped -8.76% vs QBER's -5.72%.

On 1-year performance, AUGW leads with 13.11% vs -0.39% for QBER. On fees, AUGW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, AUGW has been the lower-risk option at 0.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AUGW has performed better with a 13.11% return vs -0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

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

AUGW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs -0.11), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AUGW and QBER

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer