PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLAO vs. MMAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLAO vs. MMAX - 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 iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAO achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than MMAX's 3.09% return.


FLAO

1D
-0.05%
1M
0.99%
YTD
-0.85%
6M
-0.46%
1Y
4.33%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MMAX

1D
-0.13%
1M
0.60%
YTD
3.09%
6M
3.75%
1Y
7.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLAO vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FLAO and MMAX is 0.63, 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

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

0.65

The correlation between FLAO and MMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.65 - 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

FLAO vs. MMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAO
FLAO Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
FLAO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLAO Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLAO Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
FLAO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLAO Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

MMAX
MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

FLAO vs. MMAX - 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 iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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.


FLAOMMAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.76

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-9.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

2.51

-1.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.57

22.49

-21.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.41

112.49

-110.08

FLAO vs. MMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAO Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the MMAX Sharpe Ratio of 5.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAO and MMAX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLAOMMAXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

5.52

-4.76

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.76

3.13

-2.37

Drawdowns

FLAO vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAO drawdown since its inception was -10.12%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAO and MMAX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLAOMMAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.12%

-1.93%

-8.19%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.60%

-0.34%

-7.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.07%

-0.13%

-1.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.90%

-0.10%

-1.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.80%

0.07%

+1.73%

Volatility

FLAO vs. MMAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) is 0.32%, while iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) has a volatility of 0.36%. This indicates that FLAO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLAOMMAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.32%

0.36%

-0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.15%

0.96%

+4.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.69%

1.39%

+4.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.50%

2.49%

+5.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.50%

2.49%

+5.01%

FLAO vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAO has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than MMAX's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLAO vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

FLAO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%.


Frequently Asked Questions


FLAO and MMAX have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MMAX has higher volatility (0.36%) compared to FLAO (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAO dropped -10.12% vs MMAX's -1.93%.

On 1-year performance, MMAX leads with 7.67% vs 4.33% for FLAO. On fees, MMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MMAX has performed better with a 7.67% return vs 4.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FLAO.

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for FLAO.

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FLAO and 0.50% for MMAX.

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.52 vs 0.76), 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 FLAO and MMAX

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