FEBW vs. CAOS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FEBW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBW returned 10.21%/yr vs 3.48%/yr for CAOS. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FEBW charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

FEBW vs. CAOS - 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 Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBW achieves a 5.26% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.76% return.

FEBW

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 0.62%
• 6M: 4.33%
• YTD: 5.26%
• 1Y: 11.40%
• 3Y*: 10.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.78%

CAOS

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -0.01%
• 6M: 0.16%
• YTD: 0.76%
• 1Y: 1.73%
• 3Y*: 3.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.70%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	$6.81M	$5.39M	$5.09M
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	$262.33K	$241.63K	$322.67K

FEBW vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	5.26%	9.63%	11.37%	11.53%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.76%	2.55%	5.33%	7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBW and CAOS is -0.39, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.39
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.09

The correlation between FEBW and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.39 (1 year) to 0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FEBW vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FEBW

FEBW Risk / Return Rank: 86
FEBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FEBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
FEBW Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FEBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
FEBW Martin Ratio Rank: 88

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 56
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 48

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FEBW vs. CAOS - 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 Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	FEBW	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	1.19	+0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	1.89	+1.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.24	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.67	2.47	+0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.59	5.45	+8.14

FEBW vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBW and CAOS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FEBW vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBW drawdown since its inception was -8.82%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBW and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBW	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.82%	-3.89%	-4.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.00%	-0.76%	-3.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.82%	-3.60%	-5.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-1.13%	+1.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.66%	-0.92%	+0.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.78%	0.34%	+0.44%

Volatility

FEBW vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) has a higher volatility of 1.41% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.51%. This indicates that FEBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBW	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.41%	0.51%	+0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.18%	1.07%	+3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.95%	1.57%	+3.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.25%	4.18%	+2.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.25%	4.18%	+2.07%

FEBW vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBW vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBW nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBW and CAOS in my portfolio?

FEBW and CAOS have a correlation of -0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEBW or CAOS?

FEBW has higher volatility (1.41%) compared to CAOS (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBW dropped -8.82% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, FEBW or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, FEBW leads with 10.21% vs 3.48% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBW or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, FEBW has performed better with a 10.21% return vs 3.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBW or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEBW or CAOS?

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

What is the main difference between FEBW and CAOS?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBW and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.19), 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.