PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBT vs. QDTE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBT vs. QDTE - 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 Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a 7.90% return, which is significantly lower than QDTE's 16.58% return.


FEBT

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

QDTE

1D
-0.16%
1M
8.99%
YTD
16.58%
6M
16.20%
1Y
40.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBT vs. QDTE - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and QDTE is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 8, 2024

0.85

The correlation between FEBT and QDTE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEBT vs. QDTE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FEBT
QDTE

Technology

36.2%

-

Financial Services

11.9%
5.4%

Communication Services

10.9%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%

-

Healthcare

8.4%

-

Industrials

8.1%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.9%

-

Energy

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.3%

-

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%

-

Technology

FEBT
36.2%
QDTE

-

Financial Services

FEBT
11.9%
QDTE
5.4%

Communication Services

FEBT
10.9%
QDTE

-

Consumer Cyclical

FEBT
10.1%
QDTE

-

Healthcare

FEBT
8.4%
QDTE

-

Industrials

FEBT
8.1%
QDTE

-

Consumer Defensive

FEBT
4.9%
QDTE

-

Energy

FEBT
3.5%
QDTE

-

Utilities

FEBT
2.3%
QDTE

-

Real Estate

FEBT
1.9%
QDTE

-

Basic Materials

FEBT
1.8%
QDTE

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FEBT vs. QDTE — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT
FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank

QDTE
QDTE Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QDTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QDTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
QDTE Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
QDTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
QDTE Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
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. QDTE - 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 Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE). 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.


FEBTQDTEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.52

1.47

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.38

3.98

-0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.26

16.08

+1.19

FEBT vs. QDTE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the QDTE Sharpe Ratio of 2.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and QDTE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FEBTQDTEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.67

2.74

-0.08

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.64

1.30

+0.34

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. QDTE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, smaller than the maximum QDTE drawdown of -22.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and QDTE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBTQDTEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.19%

-22.86%

+9.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.04%

-10.20%

+4.16%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.34%

-0.16%

-0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.18%

-3.14%

+1.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.18%

2.52%

-1.34%

Volatility

FEBT vs. QDTE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) is 1.28%, while Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTE) has a volatility of 3.75%. This indicates that FEBT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDTE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBTQDTEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.28%

3.75%

-2.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.98%

11.01%

-5.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.67%

14.81%

-7.14%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.75%

18.43%

-8.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.75%

18.43%

-8.68%

FEBT vs. QDTE - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than QDTE's 0.97% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEBT vs. QDTE - Dividend Comparison

FEBT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QDTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 42.16%.


Frequently Asked Questions


FEBT and QDTE have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QDTE has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to FEBT (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs QDTE's -22.86%.

On 1-year performance, QDTE leads with 40.36% vs 20.34% for FEBT. On fees, FEBT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. 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.

Over the 1-year period, QDTE has performed better with a 40.36% return vs 20.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for QDTE.

QDTE has the higher dividend yield at 42.16%, compared with 0.00% for FEBT.

FEBT is categorized as Options Trading, while QDTE is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBT and 0.97% for QDTE.

QDTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.67), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEBT and QDTE

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer