MARU vs. QB

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

MARU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds - MARU tracks the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) Price Return while QB tracks the Nasdaq-100. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MARU returned 14.85% vs 18.61% for QB. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MARU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.

Performance

MARU vs. QB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MARU achieves a 7.14% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.42% return.

MARU

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: -0.12%
• 6M: 5.83%
• YTD: 7.14%
• 1Y: 14.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QB

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 2.44%
• 6M: 11.41%
• YTD: 12.42%
• 1Y: 18.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MARU vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF	7.14%	9.41%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	12.42%	6.10%

Correlation

The correlation between MARU and QB is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.78

The correlation between MARU and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MARU vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MARU

MARU Risk / Return Rank: 52
MARU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
MARU Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
MARU Omega Ratio Rank: 48
MARU Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
MARU Martin Ratio Rank: 59

QB

QB Risk / Return Rank: 94
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QB 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.

MARU vs. QB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.

	MARU	QB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.40	2.66	-1.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	3.87	-1.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.63	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.27	5.38	-3.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.10	25.93	-17.83

MARU vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MARU Sharpe Ratio is 1.40, which is lower than the QB Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MARU and QB, 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

MARU vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MARU drawdown since its inception was -9.91%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARU and QB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MARU	QB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.91%	-3.47%	-6.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.56%	-3.47%	-3.09%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.20%	-0.22%	-0.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.61%	-0.42%	-1.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.84%	0.72%	+1.12%

Volatility

MARU vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) has a higher volatility of 3.58% compared to ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) at 2.71%. This indicates that MARU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MARU	QB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.58%	2.71%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.30%	5.83%	+2.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.62%	7.03%	+3.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.01%	6.91%	+5.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.01%	6.91%	+5.10%

MARU vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MARU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

MARU vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

MARU has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%.

Position	TTM	2025
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF	0.00%	0.00%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	0.77%	0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MARU and QB in my portfolio?

MARU and QB have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MARU or QB?

MARU has higher volatility (3.58%) compared to QB (2.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARU dropped -9.91% vs QB's -3.47%.

Which ETF is better, MARU or QB?

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.61% vs 14.85% for MARU. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, QB has been the lower-risk option at 2.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MARU or QB?

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.61% return vs 14.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MARU or QB?

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MARU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MARU or QB?

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.00% for MARU.

What is the main difference between MARU and QB?

MARU tracks SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) Price Return, while QB tracks Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: AllianzIM and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MARU and 0.58% for QB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 1.40), 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.