FEBT vs. ISWN

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and ISWN (Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF) are both Options Trading funds. FEBT is actively managed, while ISWN is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBT returned 15.49%/yr vs 8.37%/yr for ISWN. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FEBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ISWN.

Performance

FEBT vs. ISWN - 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 Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a 6.90% return, which is significantly higher than ISWN's 4.03% return.

FEBT

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: -0.24%
• YTD: 6.90%
• 6M: 6.53%
• 1Y: 18.40%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISWN

• 1D: -1.33%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 4.03%
• 6M: 3.82%
• 1Y: 12.46%
• 3Y*: 8.37%
• 5Y*: -0.26%
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBT vs. ISWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	6.90%	12.72%	17.29%	15.47%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	4.03%	23.23%	-3.96%	1.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and ISWN is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2023	0.55

The correlation between FEBT and ISWN shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (all time) to 0.65 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. ISWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 79
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

ISWN

ISWN Risk / Return Rank: 29
ISWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
ISWN Omega Ratio Rank: 28
ISWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
ISWN Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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. ISWN - 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 Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). 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	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.37	0.98	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.39	1.45	+1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.18	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	1.30	+1.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.28	4.19	+11.09

FEBT vs. ISWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.37, which is higher than the ISWN Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and ISWN, 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

FEBT vs. ISWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, smaller than the maximum ISWN drawdown of -32.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and ISWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	ISWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-32.35%	+19.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	-9.63%	+3.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	-13.77%	+0.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.26%	-4.26%	+3.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.17%	-16.05%	+14.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.21%	2.98%	-1.77%

Volatility

FEBT vs. ISWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) is 2.39%, while Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN) has a volatility of 4.70%. This indicates that FEBT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	ISWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.39%	4.70%	-2.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.28%	10.86%	-4.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.84%	12.76%	-4.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.76%	11.82%	-2.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.76%	11.67%	-1.91%

FEBT vs. ISWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than ISWN's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBT vs. ISWN - Dividend Comparison

FEBT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ISWN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.83%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	2.83%	2.89%	3.27%	2.91%	2.00%	0.76%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBT and ISWN in my portfolio?

FEBT and ISWN have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEBT or ISWN?

ISWN has higher volatility (4.70%) compared to FEBT (2.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs ISWN's -32.35%.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or ISWN?

On 3-year performance, FEBT leads with 15.49% vs 8.37% for ISWN. On fees, ISWN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, FEBT has been the lower-risk option at 2.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBT or ISWN?

Over the 3-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 15.49% return vs 8.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or ISWN?

ISWN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBT.

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

ISWN has the higher dividend yield at 2.83%, compared with 0.00% for FEBT.

What is the main difference between FEBT and ISWN?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBT and 0.49% for ISWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 0.98), 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.