FLAO vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLAO (AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. FLAO is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, FLAO returned 4.33% vs 28.83% for TMAR. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLAO charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

FLAO vs. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAO achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.

FLAO

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

TMAR

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 14.45%
• 6M: 15.92%
• 1Y: 28.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAO vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FLAO AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF	-0.85%	5.08%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	14.45%	14.71%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAO and TMAR is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025	0.58

The correlation between FLAO and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FLAO vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAO

FLAO Risk / Return Rank: 22
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

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.76	3.06	-2.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	4.63	-3.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.77	-0.59
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	7.95	-7.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.41	38.42	-36.01
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. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAO Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAO and TMAR, 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	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76	3.06	-2.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	2.25	-1.49

Drawdowns

FLAO vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAO drawdown since its inception was -10.12%, roughly equal to the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAO and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAO	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.12%	-9.93%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.60%	-3.64%	-3.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	-0.72%	-1.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.90%	-0.66%	-1.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.80%	0.75%	+1.05%

Volatility

FLAO vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) is 0.32%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that FLAO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLAO	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	4.53%	-4.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.15%	8.17%	-3.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.69%	9.47%	-3.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.50%	11.42%	-3.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.50%	11.42%	-3.92%

FLAO vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAO has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLAO vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FLAO nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAO and TMAR in my portfolio?

FLAO and TMAR have a correlation of 0.61, 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 TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to FLAO (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAO dropped -10.12% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, FLAO or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 4.33% for FLAO. On fees, FLAO is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FLAO has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAO or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 4.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAO or TMAR?

FLAO is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between FLAO and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FLAO and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 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.