PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBU vs. QB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBU vs. QB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Feb ETF (FEBU) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBU achieves a 7.39% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.15% return.


FEBU

1D
-0.57%
1M
0.81%
6M
5.42%
YTD
7.39%
1Y
15.27%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QB

1D
-0.14%
1M
3.02%
6M
10.85%
YTD
12.15%
1Y
18.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBU vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FEBU and QB is 0.78, 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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.77

The correlation between FEBU and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FEBU vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBU
FEBU Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
FEBU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBU Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBU Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBU Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
Martin Ratio Rank

QB
QB Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

FEBU vs. QB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Feb ETF (FEBU) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.


FEBUQBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.62

-0.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.56

5.28

-2.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.14

25.48

-16.33

FEBU vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBU Sharpe Ratio is 1.55, which is lower than the QB Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBU and QB, 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...

Drawdowns

FEBU vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBU drawdown since its inception was -11.73%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBU and QB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBUQBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.73%

-3.47%

-8.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.99%

-3.47%

-2.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.32%

-0.31%

-1.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.89%

-0.42%

-1.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.67%

0.72%

+0.95%

Volatility

FEBU vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Feb ETF (FEBU) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) have volatilities of 3.10% and 3.05%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBUQBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.10%

3.05%

+0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.44%

5.83%

+1.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.90%

7.03%

+2.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.50%

6.93%

+4.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.50%

6.93%

+4.57%

FEBU vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEBU vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

FEBU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%.


Frequently Asked Questions


FEBU and QB have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FEBU has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to QB (3.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBU dropped -11.73% vs QB's -3.47%.

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.28% vs 15.27% for FEBU. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.28% return vs 15.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBU.

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for FEBU.

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBU and 0.58% for QB.

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.55), 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 FEBU and QB

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