PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBW vs. AAPR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBW vs. AAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBW achieves a 4.48% return, which is significantly higher than AAPR's 3.40% return.


FEBW

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.34%
YTD
4.48%
6M
4.67%
1Y
13.16%
3Y*
10.76%
5Y*
10Y*

AAPR

1D
-0.14%
1M
-0.25%
YTD
3.40%
6M
3.56%
1Y
9.11%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBW vs. AAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FEBW and AAPR is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024

0.80

The correlation between FEBW and AAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.81 - 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

FEBW vs. AAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBW
FEBW Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
FEBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBW Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBW Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

AAPR
AAPR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
AAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
AAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

FEBW vs. AAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR). 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.


FEBWAAPRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.96

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.06

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.86

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.31

9.48

-6.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.02

47.98

-30.96

FEBW vs. AAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is comparable to the AAPR Sharpe Ratio of 3.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBW and AAPR, 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

FEBW vs. AAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBW drawdown since its inception was -8.82%, which is greater than AAPR's maximum drawdown of -5.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBW and AAPR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBWAAPRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.82%

-5.99%

-2.83%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.00%

-0.96%

-3.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.27%

-0.56%

+0.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.67%

-0.45%

-0.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.77%

0.19%

+0.58%

Volatility

FEBW vs. AAPR - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) has a higher volatility of 1.41% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR) at 1.06%. This indicates that FEBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBWAAPRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.41%

1.06%

+0.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.99%

1.85%

+2.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.85%

2.48%

+2.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.30%

4.80%

+1.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.30%

4.80%

+1.50%

FEBW vs. AAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than AAPR's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEBW vs. AAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBW nor AAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


FEBW and AAPR have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FEBW has higher volatility (1.41%) compared to AAPR (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBW dropped -8.82% vs AAPR's -5.99%.

On 1-year performance, FEBW leads with 13.16% vs 9.11% for AAPR. On fees, FEBW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, AAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FEBW has performed better with a 13.16% return vs 9.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for AAPR.

FEBW and AAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBW and 0.79% for AAPR.

AAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.69 vs 2.73), 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 FEBW and AAPR

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