DMAR vs. FEBT

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT).

DMAR and FEBT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. DMAR is an actively managed fund by FT Vest. It was launched on Mar 18, 2021. FEBT is an actively managed fund by Allianz. It was launched on Feb 1, 2023.

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.

DMAR vs. FEBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March	1.79%	9.13%	12.74%	11.36%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	-1.69%	12.72%	17.29%	14.73%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DMAR achieves a 1.79% return, which is significantly higher than FEBT's -1.69% return.

DMAR

• 1D: 1.41%
• 1M: 0.84%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 4.00%
• 1Y: 12.53%
• 3Y*: 11.15%
• 5Y*: 7.05%
• 10Y*: —

FEBT

• 1D: 2.03%
• 1M: -3.34%
• YTD: -1.69%
• 6M: 1.12%
• 1Y: 14.62%
• 3Y*: 14.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DMAR vs. FEBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

DMAR

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March

FEBT

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF

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: 87
DMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
DMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
DMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
DMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
DMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 70
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 74
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

	DMAR	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.17	+0.49
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	1.76	+0.69
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.28	+0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.08	1.70	+0.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.69	8.88	+4.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DMAR vs. FEBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DMAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is higher than the FEBT Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMAR and FEBT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DMAR	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.66	1.17	+0.49
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	1.37	-0.34

Correlation

The correlation between DMAR and FEBT is 0.85, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

DMAR vs. FEBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither DMAR nor FEBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

	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%

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	-6.15%	-8.86%	+2.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-4.13%	+3.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-1.22%	-0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.93%	1.70%	-0.77%

Volatility

DMAR vs. FEBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) is 1.94%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a volatility of 3.88%. 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	1.94%	3.88%	-1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.71%	6.11%	-3.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.59%	12.59%	-5.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.06%	9.88%	-2.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.05%	9.88%	-2.83%