FEBT vs. NVBT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and NVBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBT returned 16.37%/yr vs 12.89%/yr for NVBT. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

FEBT vs. NVBT - 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 Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FEBT having a 7.90% return and NVBT slightly lower at 7.57%.

FEBT

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 6M: 8.78%
• 1Y: 20.34%
• 3Y*: 16.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NVBT

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 3.28%
• YTD: 7.57%
• 6M: 8.01%
• 1Y: 18.70%
• 3Y*: 12.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBT vs. NVBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	7.90%	12.72%	17.29%	14.73%
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	7.57%	12.84%	12.03%	9.79%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and NVBT is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.94

The correlation between FEBT and NVBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEBT vs. NVBT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FEBT	NVBT
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. NVBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 81
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

NVBT

NVBT Risk / Return Rank: 74
NVBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
NVBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
NVBT Omega Ratio Rank: 79
NVBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
NVBT Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. NVBT - 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 Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT). 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	NVBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.67	2.41	+0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	3.46	+0.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.47	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	3.03	+0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.26	15.08	+2.18
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. NVBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the NVBT Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and NVBT, 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

	FEBT	NVBT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.67	2.41	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	1.34	+0.31

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. NVBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, roughly equal to the maximum NVBT drawdown of -12.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and NVBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	NVBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-12.90%	-0.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	-6.21%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	-12.90%	-0.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.29%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.18%	-1.35%	+0.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.18%	1.24%	-0.06%

Volatility

FEBT vs. NVBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) is 1.28%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) has a volatility of 1.53%. This indicates that FEBT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NVBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	NVBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.28%	1.53%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.98%	6.32%	-0.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.67%	7.80%	-0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.75%	10.33%	-0.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.75%	10.33%	-0.58%

FEBT vs. NVBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FEBT and NVBT have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

FEBT vs. NVBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor NVBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBT and NVBT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, FEBT and NVBT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FEBT or NVBT?

NVBT has higher volatility (1.53%) compared to FEBT (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs NVBT's -12.90%.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or NVBT?

On 3-year performance, FEBT leads with 16.37% vs 12.89% for NVBT. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FEBT has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBT or NVBT?

Over the 3-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 16.37% return vs 12.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or NVBT?

FEBT and NVBT have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.41), 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.