FEBW vs. RSBY

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

FEBW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF) and RSBY (Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FEBW is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while RSBY is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Return Stacked. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FEBW returned 12.94% vs 20.17% for RSBY. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. FEBW charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.98%/yr for RSBY.

Performance

FEBW vs. RSBY - 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 Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBW achieves a 3.97% return, which is significantly lower than RSBY's 19.04% return.

FEBW

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: 3.97%
• 6M: 4.72%
• 1Y: 12.94%
• 3Y*: 10.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RSBY

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: -1.29%
• YTD: 19.04%
• 6M: 15.93%
• 1Y: 20.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBW vs. RSBY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	3.97%	9.63%	3.07%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	19.04%	-12.98%	-7.90%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBW and RSBY is -0.32, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2024	-0.18

The correlation between FEBW and RSBY shifts across timeframes, from -0.32 (1 year) to -0.18 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FEBW vs. RSBY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FEBW	RSBY
Technology	36.2%	53.7%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	3.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	7.7%
Energy	3.5%	0.6%
Utilities	2.3%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.1%

Return for Risk

FEBW vs. RSBY — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBW

FEBW Risk / Return Rank: 85
FEBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FEBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FEBW Omega Ratio Rank: 91
FEBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBW Martin Ratio Rank: 86

RSBY

RSBY Risk / Return Rank: 51
RSBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
RSBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
RSBY Omega Ratio Rank: 51
RSBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
RSBY Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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. RSBY - 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 Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY). 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.

	FEBW	RSBY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.69	1.72	+0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.90	2.51	+1.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.30	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	2.55	+0.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.86	5.96	+10.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FEBW vs. RSBY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.69, which is higher than the RSBY Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBW and RSBY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FEBW	RSBY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.69	1.72	+0.97
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.71	-0.19	+1.90

Drawdowns

FEBW vs. RSBY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBW drawdown since its inception was -8.82%, smaller than the maximum RSBY drawdown of -23.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBW and RSBY.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBW	RSBY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.82%	-23.32%	+14.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.00%	-7.95%	+3.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.82%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.76%	-6.04%	+5.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.67%	-13.76%	+13.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.77%	3.40%	-2.63%

Volatility

FEBW vs. RSBY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF (FEBW) is 1.06%, while Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) has a volatility of 1.93%. This indicates that FEBW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RSBY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBW	RSBY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.06%	1.93%	-0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.88%	8.51%	-4.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.84%	11.78%	-6.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.30%	13.53%	-7.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.30%	13.53%	-7.23%

FEBW vs. RSBY - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than RSBY's 0.98% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBW vs. RSBY - Dividend Comparison

FEBW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RSBY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.14%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	1.74%	2.07%	2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBW and RSBY in my portfolio?

FEBW and RSBY have a correlation of -0.32, 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 RSBY?

RSBY has higher volatility (1.93%) compared to FEBW (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBW dropped -8.82% vs RSBY's -23.32%.

Which ETF is better, FEBW or RSBY?

On 1-year performance, RSBY leads with 20.17% vs 12.94% for FEBW. On fees, FEBW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FEBW has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBW or RSBY?

Over the 1-year period, RSBY has performed better with a 20.17% return vs 12.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBW or RSBY?

FEBW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for RSBY.

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

RSBY has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.00% for FEBW.

What is the main difference between FEBW and RSBY?

FEBW is categorized as Options Trading, while RSBY is Multistrategy. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBW and 0.98% for RSBY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.72), 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.