PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NVBU vs. QBSF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NVBU vs. QBSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Nov ETF (NVBU) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NVBU achieves a 5.46% return, which is significantly higher than QBSF's 2.67% return.


NVBU

1D
-0.83%
1M
-0.94%
YTD
5.46%
6M
4.97%
1Y
17.57%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QBSF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.37%
YTD
2.67%
6M
2.84%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NVBU vs. QBSF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between NVBU and QBSF is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025

0.79

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

NVBU vs. QBSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVBU
NVBU Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
NVBU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NVBU Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
NVBU Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
NVBU Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
NVBU Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

QBSF

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

NVBU vs. QBSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Nov ETF (NVBU) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF). 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.


NVBUQBSFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.28

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.39

NVBU vs. QBSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NVBU vs. QBSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVBU drawdown since its inception was -11.97%, which is greater than QBSF's maximum drawdown of -1.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVBU and QBSF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NVBUQBSFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.97%

-1.58%

-10.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.52%

0.00%

-2.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.79%

-0.21%

-1.58%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.42%

Volatility

NVBU vs. QBSF - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NVBUQBSFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.60%

2.67%

+6.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.20%

2.67%

+8.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.20%

2.67%

+8.53%

NVBU vs. QBSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVBU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than QBSF's 0.64% expense ratio.


Dividends

NVBU vs. QBSF - Dividend Comparison

Neither NVBU nor QBSF has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


NVBU and QBSF have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, QBSF is cheaper at 0.64% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QBSF is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for NVBU.

NVBU and QBSF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Their fees differ too: 0.74% for NVBU and 0.64% for QBSF.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NVBU and QBSF

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer