MART vs. ISWN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MART (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF) and ISWN (Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF) are both Options Trading funds. MART is actively managed, while ISWN is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MART returned 16.35%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for ISWN. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MART charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ISWN.

Performance

MART vs. ISWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MART achieves a 8.18% return, which is significantly higher than ISWN's 4.28% return.

MART

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 2.60%
• YTD: 8.18%
• 6M: 9.29%
• 1Y: 19.86%
• 3Y*: 16.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISWN

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 4.28%
• 6M: 4.94%
• 1Y: 13.27%
• 3Y*: 8.12%
• 5Y*: -0.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

MART vs. ISWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MART Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF	8.18%	14.93%	15.60%	16.94%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	4.28%	23.23%	-3.96%	6.21%

Correlation

The correlation between MART and ISWN 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2023	0.54

The correlation between MART and ISWN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

MART vs. ISWN - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MART	ISWN
Technology	36.2%	10.3%
Financial Services	11.9%	1.6%
Communication Services	10.9%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	7.7%
Healthcare	8.4%	10.6%
Industrials	8.1%	19.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	6.7%
Energy	3.5%	4.0%
Utilities	2.3%	4.0%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	5.9%

Return for Risk

MART vs. ISWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

MART

MART Risk / Return Rank: 86
MART Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
MART Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
MART Omega Ratio Rank: 90
MART Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MART Martin Ratio Rank: 90

ISWN

ISWN Risk / Return Rank: 30
ISWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Omega Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

MART vs. ISWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). 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.

	MART	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	1.09	+1.73
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.16	1.60	+2.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	1.20	+0.39
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	1.38	+2.38
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	21.14	4.67	+16.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MART vs. ISWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MART Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is higher than the ISWN Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MART and ISWN, 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

	MART	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	1.09	+1.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.79	0.01	+1.78

Drawdowns

MART vs. ISWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MART drawdown since its inception was -11.61%, smaller than the maximum ISWN drawdown of -32.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MART and ISWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	MART	ISWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.61%	-32.35%	+20.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.30%	-9.63%	+4.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.61%	-13.77%	+2.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-4.03%	+3.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-16.17%	+15.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.94%	2.85%	-1.91%

Volatility

MART vs. ISWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) is 1.31%, while Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that MART experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MART	ISWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.31%	4.67%	-3.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.60%	10.10%	-4.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.07%	12.20%	-5.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.69%	11.67%	-1.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.69%	11.57%	-1.88%

MART vs. ISWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

MART has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than ISWN's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

MART vs. ISWN - Dividend Comparison

MART has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ISWN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.82%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	2.82%	2.89%	3.27%	2.91%	2.00%	0.76%
MART Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MART and ISWN in my portfolio?

MART and ISWN 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.

Which is riskier, MART or ISWN?

ISWN has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to MART (1.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MART dropped -11.61% vs ISWN's -32.35%.

Which ETF is better, MART or ISWN?

On 3-year performance, MART leads with 16.35% vs 8.12% for ISWN. On fees, ISWN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, MART has been the lower-risk option at 1.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MART or ISWN?

Over the 3-year period, MART has performed better with a 16.35% return vs 8.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MART or ISWN?

ISWN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MART.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MART or ISWN?

ISWN has the higher dividend yield at 2.82%, compared with 0.00% for MART.

What is the main difference between MART and ISWN?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MART and 0.49% for ISWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MART currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 1.09), 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.