FEBT vs. CBOX

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and CBOX (Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FEBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for CBOX.

Performance

FEBT vs. CBOX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FEBT

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 1.70%
• 6M: 8.29%
• YTD: 10.17%
• 1Y: 18.08%
• 3Y*: 15.84%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.98%

CBOX

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.43%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

*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)
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	$7.82M	$8.50M	$7.10M
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	$337.20K	$335.09K	$510.26K

FEBT vs. CBOX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	6.48%
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	1.23%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and CBOX is 0.15, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2026	0.15

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. CBOX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 85
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

CBOX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

FEBT vs. CBOX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). 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.

	FEBT	CBOX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.29	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.01	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.75	—	—

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. CBOX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, which is greater than CBOX's maximum drawdown of -2.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and CBOX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	CBOX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-2.90%	-10.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.20%	+2.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.15%	-1.50%	+0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.23%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	CBOX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.32%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.48%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.95%	7.67%	+0.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.69%	7.67%	+2.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.69%	7.67%	+2.02%

FEBT vs. CBOX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than CBOX's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBT vs. CBOX - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor CBOX has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	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 FEBT and CBOX in my portfolio?

FEBT and CBOX have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or CBOX?

On fees, CBOX is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or CBOX?

CBOX is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBT.

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

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

What is the main difference between FEBT and CBOX?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBT and 0.14% for CBOX.