FBY vs. MARO

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FBY (YieldMax META Option Income ETF) and MARO (YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from YieldMax. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBY returned -10.52% vs -20.97% for MARO. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.99% expense ratio.

Performance

FBY vs. MARO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) and YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBY achieves a -9.36% return, which is significantly lower than MARO's 30.77% return.

FBY

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -0.92%
• YTD: -9.36%
• 6M: -8.42%
• 1Y: -10.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MARO

• 1D: -1.84%
• 1M: 17.99%
• YTD: 30.77%
• 6M: 5.26%
• 1Y: -20.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBY vs. MARO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	-9.36%	1.98%	-2.91%
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	30.77%	-48.05%	-19.61%

Correlation

The correlation between FBY and MARO is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2024	0.31

Return for Risk

FBY vs. MARO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBY

FBY Risk / Return Rank: 5
FBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
FBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
FBY Omega Ratio Rank: 5
FBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FBY Martin Ratio Rank: 5

MARO

MARO Risk / Return Rank: 6
MARO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
MARO Omega Ratio Rank: 7
MARO Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

FBY vs. MARO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) and YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO). 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.

	FBY	MARO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	-0.37	-0.34	-0.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	-0.33	-0.11	-0.22
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	0.99	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.29	-0.30	+0.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	-0.63	-0.51	-0.13
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FBY vs. MARO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBY Sharpe Ratio is -0.37, which is comparable to the MARO Sharpe Ratio of -0.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBY and MARO, 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

	FBY	MARO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.37	-0.34	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.58	-0.52	+1.10

Drawdowns

FBY vs. MARO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBY drawdown since its inception was -31.53%, smaller than the maximum MARO drawdown of -71.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBY and MARO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBY	MARO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.53%	-71.75%	+40.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.50%	-65.51%	+36.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.10%	-50.17%	+28.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.80%	-41.95%	+34.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.35%	38.49%	-25.14%

Volatility

FBY vs. MARO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) is 6.15%, while YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) has a volatility of 11.33%. This indicates that FBY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MARO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBY	MARO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	11.33%	-5.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.94%	46.34%	-24.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.73%	61.48%	-32.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	28.46%	65.22%	-36.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	28.46%	65.22%	-36.76%

FBY vs. MARO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FBY and MARO have an expense ratio of 0.99%.

Dividends

FBY vs. MARO - Dividend Comparison

FBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 57.90%, less than MARO's 179.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	57.90%	55.43%	53.89%	8.31%
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	179.92%	277.68%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBY and MARO in my portfolio?

FBY and MARO have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBY or MARO?

MARO has higher volatility (11.33%) compared to FBY (6.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBY dropped -31.53% vs MARO's -71.75%.

Which ETF is better, FBY or MARO?

On 1-year performance, FBY leads with -10.52% vs -20.97% for MARO. Both ETFs have the same 0.99% expense ratio. On volatility, FBY has been the lower-risk option at 6.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBY or MARO?

Over the 1-year period, FBY has performed better with a -10.52% return vs -20.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBY or MARO?

FBY and MARO have the same expense ratio: 0.99% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBY or MARO?

MARO has the higher dividend yield at 179.92%, compared with 57.90% for FBY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MARO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.34 vs -0.37), 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.