MARO vs. FBY

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MARO (YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) and FBY (YieldMax META Option Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds from YieldMax. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MARO returned -26.17% vs -6.53% for FBY. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.99% expense ratio.

Performance

MARO vs. FBY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) and YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MARO achieves a 27.88% return, which is significantly higher than FBY's -5.84% return.

MARO

• 1D: -2.22%
• 1M: 12.47%
• YTD: 27.88%
• 6M: -0.14%
• 1Y: -26.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBY

• 1D: 3.88%
• 1M: 2.31%
• YTD: -5.84%
• 6M: -4.65%
• 1Y: -6.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MARO vs. FBY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	27.88%	-48.05%	-19.61%
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	-5.84%	1.98%	-2.91%

Correlation

The correlation between MARO and FBY is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2024	0.31

Return for Risk

MARO vs. FBY — Risk / Return Rank

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

MARO

MARO Risk / Return Rank: 5
MARO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
MARO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Omega Ratio Rank: 6
MARO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
MARO Martin Ratio Rank: 6

FBY

FBY Risk / Return Rank: 6
FBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
FBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FBY Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
FBY Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

MARO vs. FBY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) and YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY). 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.

	MARO	FBY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.43	-0.23	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.27	-0.12	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	0.98	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.40	-0.22	-0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.68	-0.49	-0.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MARO vs. FBY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MARO Sharpe Ratio is -0.43, which is lower than the FBY Sharpe Ratio of -0.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MARO and FBY, 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

	MARO	FBY	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.43	-0.23	-0.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.54	0.64	-1.17

Drawdowns

MARO vs. FBY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MARO drawdown since its inception was -71.75%, which is greater than FBY's maximum drawdown of -31.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARO and FBY.

Drawdown Indicators

	MARO	FBY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.75%	-31.53%	-40.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-65.51%	-29.50%	-36.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-51.27%	-19.08%	-32.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-41.97%	-7.82%	-34.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	38.58%	13.41%	+25.17%

Volatility

MARO vs. FBY - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (MARO) has a higher volatility of 11.56% compared to YieldMax META Option Income ETF (FBY) at 7.24%. This indicates that MARO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MARO	FBY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.56%	7.24%	+4.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	46.34%	22.27%	+24.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	61.49%	28.89%	+32.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	65.15%	28.53%	+36.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	65.15%	28.53%	+36.62%

MARO vs. FBY - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both MARO and FBY have an expense ratio of 0.99%.

Dividends

MARO vs. FBY - Dividend Comparison

MARO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 183.99%, more than FBY's 55.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FBY YieldMax META Option Income ETF	55.74%	55.43%	53.89%	8.31%
MARO YieldMax MARA Option Income Strategy ETF	183.99%	277.68%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MARO and FBY in my portfolio?

MARO and FBY have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MARO or FBY?

MARO has higher volatility (11.56%) compared to FBY (7.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARO dropped -71.75% vs FBY's -31.53%.

Which ETF is better, MARO or FBY?

On 1-year performance, FBY leads with -6.53% vs -26.17% for MARO. Both ETFs have the same 0.99% expense ratio. On volatility, FBY has been the lower-risk option at 7.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MARO or FBY?

Over the 1-year period, FBY has performed better with a -6.53% return vs -26.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MARO or FBY?

MARO and FBY have the same expense ratio: 0.99% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MARO or FBY?

MARO has the higher dividend yield at 183.99%, compared with 55.74% for FBY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.23 vs -0.43), 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.