FEBT vs. SIXJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and SIXJ (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. FEBT is actively managed, while SIXJ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBT returned 16.37%/yr vs 13.88%/yr for SIXJ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

FEBT vs. SIXJ - 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 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF (SIXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a 7.90% return, which is significantly higher than SIXJ's 5.77% return.

FEBT

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

SIXJ

• 1D: -0.00%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 5.77%
• 6M: 6.85%
• 1Y: 16.93%
• 3Y*: 13.88%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBT vs. SIXJ - 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%
SIXJ AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF	5.77%	12.81%	14.48%	12.95%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and SIXJ is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2023	0.88

The correlation between FEBT and SIXJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

FEBT vs. SIXJ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FEBT	SIXJ
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. SIXJ — 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

SIXJ

SIXJ Risk / Return Rank: 87
SIXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
SIXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
SIXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 92
SIXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
SIXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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. SIXJ - 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 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF (SIXJ). 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	SIXJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.67	2.91	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	4.27	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.61	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	3.75	-0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.26	20.41	-3.15
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. SIXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the SIXJ Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and SIXJ, 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	SIXJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.67	2.91	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	0.86	+0.78

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. SIXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, smaller than the maximum SIXJ drawdown of -14.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and SIXJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	SIXJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-14.07%	+0.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	-4.53%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	-10.89%	-2.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.00%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.18%	-2.87%	+1.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.18%	0.83%	+0.35%

Volatility

FEBT vs. SIXJ - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a higher volatility of 1.28% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF (SIXJ) at 0.75%. This indicates that FEBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SIXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	SIXJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.28%	0.75%	+0.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.98%	4.60%	+1.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.67%	5.84%	+1.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.75%	10.02%	-0.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.75%	10.02%	-0.27%

FEBT vs. SIXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FEBT vs. SIXJ - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor SIXJ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
SIXJ AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBT and SIXJ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, FEBT and SIXJ 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 SIXJ?

FEBT has higher volatility (1.28%) compared to SIXJ (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs SIXJ's -14.07%.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or SIXJ?

On 3-year performance, FEBT leads with 16.37% vs 13.88% for SIXJ. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, SIXJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBT or SIXJ?

Over the 3-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 16.37% return vs 13.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or SIXJ?

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

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SIXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 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.