NVBT vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

NVBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NVBT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NVBT returned 15.19% vs 19.39% for QFLR. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NVBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.

Performance

NVBT vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NVBT achieves a 6.09% return, which is significantly higher than QFLR's 3.09% return.

NVBT

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -0.53%
• YTD: 6.09%
• 6M: 5.39%
• 1Y: 15.19%
• 3Y*: 11.82%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QFLR

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -2.43%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 6M: 2.26%
• 1Y: 19.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NVBT vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	6.09%	12.84%	10.59%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	3.09%	17.27%	16.30%

Correlation

The correlation between NVBT and QFLR is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2024	0.81

The correlation between NVBT and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NVBT vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVBT

NVBT Risk / Return Rank: 67
NVBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
NVBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
NVBT Omega Ratio Rank: 70
NVBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
NVBT Martin Ratio Rank: 73

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 53
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

NVBT vs. QFLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.

	NVBT	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	1.53	+0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	2.06	+0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.29	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.46	2.56	-0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.90	10.06	+1.84

NVBT vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVBT and QFLR, 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

NVBT vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVBT drawdown since its inception was -12.90%, smaller than the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVBT and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVBT	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.90%	-13.97%	+1.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.21%	-7.61%	+1.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.66%	-4.02%	+2.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.35%	-2.51%	+1.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.28%	1.93%	-0.65%

Volatility

NVBT vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) is 2.88%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 6.55%. This indicates that NVBT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVBT	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.88%	6.55%	-3.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.74%	9.85%	-3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.10%	12.76%	-4.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.35%	13.12%	-2.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.35%	13.12%	-2.77%

NVBT vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

NVBT vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

Neither NVBT nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVBT and QFLR in my portfolio?

NVBT and QFLR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NVBT or QFLR?

QFLR has higher volatility (6.55%) compared to NVBT (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVBT dropped -12.90% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, NVBT or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 19.39% vs 15.19% for NVBT. On fees, NVBT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, NVBT has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVBT or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 19.39% return vs 15.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVBT or QFLR?

NVBT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NVBT or QFLR?

NVBT and QFLR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NVBT and QFLR?

NVBT is categorized as Options Trading, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for NVBT and 0.89% for QFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NVBT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.53), 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.