FEBW vs. NVBT

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FEBW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF) and NVBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FEBW returned 10.21%/yr vs 10.86%/yr for NVBT. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

FEBW vs. NVBT - 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 Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT). 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 lower than NVBT's 8.04% 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%

NVBT

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 0.75%
• 6M: 6.96%
• YTD: 8.04%
• 1Y: 15.24%
• 3Y*: 10.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.98%

*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)
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	$262.33K	$241.63K	$322.67K
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	$29.17K	$66.72K	$63.56K

FEBW vs. NVBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	5.26%	9.63%	11.37%	11.26%
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	8.04%	12.84%	12.03%	10.73%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBW and NVBT is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2023	0.89

The correlation between FEBW and NVBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FEBW vs. NVBT — 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

NVBT

NVBT Risk / Return Rank: 74
NVBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
NVBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
NVBT Omega Ratio Rank: 76
NVBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
NVBT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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. NVBT - 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 Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT). 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	NVBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	1.68	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	2.42	+0.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.32	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.67	2.28	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.59	10.80	+2.79

FEBW vs. NVBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the NVBT Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBW and NVBT, 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. NVBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBW drawdown since its inception was -8.82%, smaller than the maximum NVBT drawdown of -12.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBW and NVBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBW	NVBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.82%	-12.90%	+4.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.00%	-6.21%	+2.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.82%	-12.90%	+4.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.32%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.66%	-1.33%	+0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.78%	1.31%	-0.53%

Volatility

FEBW vs. NVBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) is 1.41%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) has a volatility of 2.58%. This indicates that FEBW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NVBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBW	NVBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.41%	2.58%	-1.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.18%	6.95%	-2.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.95%	8.43%	-3.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.25%	10.31%	-4.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.25%	10.31%	-4.06%

FEBW vs. NVBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FEBW and NVBT have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

FEBW vs. NVBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBW nor NVBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.14%
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBW and NVBT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, FEBW and NVBT 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, FEBW or NVBT?

NVBT has higher volatility (2.58%) compared to FEBW (1.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBW dropped -8.82% vs NVBT's -12.90%.

Which ETF is better, FEBW or NVBT?

On 3-year performance, NVBT leads with 10.86% vs 10.21% for FEBW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FEBW has been the lower-risk option at 1.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBW or NVBT?

Over the 3-year period, NVBT has performed better with a 10.86% return vs 10.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBW or NVBT?

FEBW and NVBT have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.68), 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.