GFEB vs. IVVM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GFEB (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February) and IVVM (iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF) are both Options Trading funds. GFEB is passively managed, while IVVM is actively managed. Over the past year, GFEB returned 13.99% vs 14.52% for IVVM. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GFEB charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IVVM.

Performance

GFEB vs. IVVM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with GFEB having a 5.26% return and IVVM slightly higher at 5.35%.

GFEB

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -0.13%
• YTD: 5.26%
• 6M: 5.20%
• 1Y: 13.99%
• 3Y*: 12.38%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IVVM

• 1D: -0.62%
• 1M: -0.24%
• YTD: 5.35%
• 6M: 4.81%
• 1Y: 14.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GFEB vs. IVVM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February	5.26%	11.19%	13.06%	6.67%
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	5.35%	14.24%	16.08%	5.17%

Correlation

The correlation between GFEB and IVVM is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023	0.87

The correlation between GFEB and IVVM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GFEB vs. IVVM — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFEB

GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 84
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

IVVM

IVVM Risk / Return Rank: 68
IVVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
IVVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
IVVM Omega Ratio Rank: 73
IVVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
IVVM Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

GFEB vs. IVVM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM). 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.

	GFEB	IVVM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	2.03	+0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	2.90	+0.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.41	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	2.75	+0.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.75	13.53	+3.22

GFEB vs. IVVM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the IVVM Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFEB and IVVM, 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

GFEB vs. IVVM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFEB drawdown since its inception was -9.63%, smaller than the maximum IVVM drawdown of -11.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFEB and IVVM.

Drawdown Indicators

	GFEB	IVVM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.63%	-11.62%	+1.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.46%	-5.31%	+0.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.77%	-0.79%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.70%	-0.91%	+0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	1.08%	-0.24%

Volatility

GFEB vs. IVVM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) is 1.72%, while iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF (IVVM) has a volatility of 1.88%. This indicates that GFEB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IVVM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GFEB	IVVM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.72%	1.88%	-0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.45%	5.76%	-1.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.58%	7.21%	-1.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.57%	9.59%	-2.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.57%	9.59%	-2.02%

GFEB vs. IVVM - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFEB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IVVM's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

GFEB vs. IVVM - Dividend Comparison

GFEB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IVVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IVVM iShares Large Cap Moderate Buffer ETF	0.65%	0.68%	0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GFEB and IVVM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, GFEB and IVVM 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, GFEB or IVVM?

IVVM has higher volatility (1.88%) compared to GFEB (1.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFEB dropped -9.63% vs IVVM's -11.62%.

Which ETF is better, GFEB or IVVM?

On 1-year performance, IVVM leads with 14.52% vs 13.99% for GFEB. On fees, IVVM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GFEB has been the lower-risk option at 1.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GFEB or IVVM?

Over the 1-year period, IVVM has performed better with a 14.52% return vs 13.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GFEB or IVVM?

IVVM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GFEB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GFEB or IVVM?

IVVM has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for GFEB.

What is the main difference between GFEB and IVVM?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GFEB and 0.50% for IVVM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GFEB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.03), 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.