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

Performance

FEBU vs. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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 8.26% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.


FEBU

1D
-0.52%
1M
4.11%
YTD
8.26%
6M
7.92%
1Y
19.90%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TMAR

1D
-0.72%
1M
2.73%
YTD
14.45%
6M
15.92%
1Y
28.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBU vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FEBU and TMAR 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 (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025

0.63

The correlation between FEBU and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.65 - 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. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBU
FEBU Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
FEBU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBU Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBU Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBU Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

TMAR
TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
TMAR 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. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.


FEBUTMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.92

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.77

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.34

7.95

-4.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.90

38.42

-25.52

FEBU vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBU Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is lower than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBU and TMAR, 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


FEBUTMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.14

3.06

-0.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.26

2.25

-0.99

Drawdowns

FEBU vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBU drawdown since its inception was -11.73%, which is greater than TMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBU and TMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBUTMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.73%

-9.93%

-1.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.99%

-3.64%

-2.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.52%

-0.72%

+0.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.89%

-0.66%

-1.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.55%

0.75%

+0.80%

Volatility

FEBU vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Feb ETF (FEBU) is 2.53%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that FEBU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBUTMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.53%

4.53%

-2.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.85%

8.17%

-1.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.36%

9.47%

-0.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.47%

11.42%

+0.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.47%

11.42%

+0.05%

FEBU vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEBU vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBU nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FEBU and TMAR 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.

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to FEBU (2.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBU dropped -11.73% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 19.90% for FEBU. On fees, FEBU is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FEBU has been the lower-risk option at 2.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 19.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBU is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

FEBU and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBU and 0.95% for TMAR.

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 2.14), 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 TMAR

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