DMAR vs. FEBT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

DMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March) and FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DMAR returned 11.82%/yr vs 15.72%/yr for FEBT. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DMAR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for FEBT.

Performance

DMAR vs. FEBT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DMAR achieves a 7.18% return, which is significantly lower than FEBT's 7.54% return.

DMAR

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.26%
• YTD: 7.18%
• 6M: 7.27%
• 1Y: 14.72%
• 3Y*: 11.82%
• 5Y*: 7.64%
• 10Y*: —

FEBT

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 7.54%
• 6M: 7.41%
• 1Y: 19.91%
• 3Y*: 15.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DMAR vs. FEBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March	7.18%	9.13%	12.74%	11.69%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	7.54%	12.72%	17.29%	15.47%

Correlation

The correlation between DMAR and FEBT is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2023	0.86

The correlation between DMAR and FEBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DMAR vs. FEBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

DMAR

DMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
DMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
DMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
DMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
DMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
DMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 81
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

DMAR vs. FEBT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). 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.

	DMAR	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.94	2.56	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.52	3.66	+2.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.99	1.50	+0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.66	3.31	+6.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	57.32	16.57	+40.75

DMAR vs. FEBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.94, which is higher than the FEBT Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMAR and FEBT, 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

DMAR vs. FEBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMAR drawdown since its inception was -9.84%, smaller than the maximum FEBT drawdown of -13.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMAR and FEBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	DMAR	FEBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.84%	-13.19%	+3.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.53%	-6.04%	+4.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.16%	-13.19%	+4.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.67%	+0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.84%	-1.17%	-0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.26%	1.20%	-0.94%

Volatility

DMAR vs. FEBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) is 1.39%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a volatility of 2.31%. This indicates that DMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DMAR	FEBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.39%	2.31%	-0.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.02%	6.26%	-3.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.76%	7.82%	-4.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.05%	9.75%	-2.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.96%	9.75%	-2.79%

DMAR vs. FEBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FEBT's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

DMAR vs. FEBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither DMAR nor FEBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
DMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DMAR and FEBT in my portfolio?

DMAR and FEBT have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DMAR or FEBT?

FEBT has higher volatility (2.31%) compared to DMAR (1.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DMAR dropped -9.84% vs FEBT's -13.19%.

Which ETF is better, DMAR or FEBT?

On 3-year performance, FEBT leads with 15.72% vs 11.82% for DMAR. On fees, FEBT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, DMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DMAR or FEBT?

Over the 3-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 15.72% return vs 11.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DMAR or FEBT?

FEBT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DMAR or FEBT?

DMAR and FEBT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DMAR and FEBT?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DMAR and 0.74% for FEBT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 vs 2.56), 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.