FLAO vs. APRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FLAO (AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF) and APRW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLAO is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Allianz, while APRW is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FLAO returned 4.36% vs 12.72% for APRW. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

FLAO vs. APRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAO achieves a -0.82% return, which is significantly lower than APRW's 6.38% return.

FLAO

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: -0.82%
• 6M: -0.36%
• 1Y: 4.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APRW

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 1.21%
• YTD: 6.38%
• 6M: 7.12%
• 1Y: 12.72%
• 3Y*: 10.27%
• 5Y*: 7.14%
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAO vs. APRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FLAO AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF	-0.82%	3.38%	10.02%
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF	6.38%	6.18%	8.71%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAO and APRW is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024	0.89

The correlation between FLAO and APRW shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (1 year) to 0.89 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLAO vs. APRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLAO	APRW
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

FLAO vs. APRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAO

FLAO Risk / Return Rank: 21
FLAO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FLAO Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
FLAO Omega Ratio Rank: 27
FLAO Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
FLAO Martin Ratio Rank: 21

APRW

APRW Risk / Return Rank: 98
APRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
APRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

FLAO vs. APRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW). 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.

	FLAO	APRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.77	4.88	-4.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	8.96	-7.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	2.24	-1.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.58	17.00	-16.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.42	87.02	-84.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLAO vs. APRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAO Sharpe Ratio is 0.77, which is lower than the APRW Sharpe Ratio of 4.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAO and APRW, 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

	FLAO	APRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77	4.88	-4.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.07	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	1.15	-0.39

Drawdowns

FLAO vs. APRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAO drawdown since its inception was -10.12%, which is greater than APRW's maximum drawdown of -9.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAO and APRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAO	APRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.12%	-9.61%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.60%	-0.75%	-6.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.61%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.03%	0.00%	-2.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.90%	-1.12%	-0.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	0.15%	+1.66%

Volatility

FLAO vs. APRW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) is 0.31%, while AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW) has a volatility of 0.59%. This indicates that FLAO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than APRW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLAO	APRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.31%	0.59%	-0.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.15%	1.84%	+3.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.69%	2.62%	+3.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.50%	6.72%	+0.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.50%	6.41%	+1.09%

FLAO vs. APRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLAO and APRW have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

FLAO vs. APRW - Dividend Comparison

Neither FLAO nor APRW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.67%
FLAO AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAO and APRW in my portfolio?

FLAO and APRW have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLAO or APRW?

APRW has higher volatility (0.59%) compared to FLAO (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAO dropped -10.12% vs APRW's -9.61%.

Which ETF is better, FLAO or APRW?

On 1-year performance, APRW leads with 12.72% vs 4.36% for FLAO. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. On volatility, FLAO has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAO or APRW?

Over the 1-year period, APRW has performed better with a 12.72% return vs 4.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAO or APRW?

FLAO and APRW have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLAO or APRW?

FLAO and APRW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FLAO and APRW?

FLAO is categorized as Defined Outcome, while APRW is Options Trading.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.88 vs 0.77), 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.