FEBT vs. DMAR

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

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

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

Performance

FEBT vs. DMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FEBT vs. DMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

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

FEBT

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

DMAR

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

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

FEBT vs. DMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

FEBT vs. DMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

FEBT vs. DMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR). 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.

	FEBT	DMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	1.66	-0.49
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.76	2.45	-0.69
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.51	-0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	2.08	-0.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.88	13.69	-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.

FEBT vs. DMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is comparable to the DMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and DMAR, 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

	FEBT	DMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.17	1.66	-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	1.37	1.03	+0.34

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and DMAR 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

FEBT vs. DMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor DMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

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

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. DMAR - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	DMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-9.84%	-3.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-6.15%	-2.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.13%	-0.14%	-3.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.22%	-1.91%	+0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.70%	0.93%	+0.77%

Volatility

FEBT vs. DMAR - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a higher volatility of 3.88% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - March (DMAR) at 1.94%. This indicates that FEBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	DMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.88%	1.94%	+1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.11%	2.71%	+3.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.59%	7.59%	+5.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.88%	7.06%	+2.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.88%	7.05%	+2.83%