NVBW vs. AUGT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NVBW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF) and AUGT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF) are both Options Trading funds from Allianz. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NVBW returned 12.47% vs 19.22% for AUGT. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.74% expense ratio.

Performance

NVBW vs. AUGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF (NVBW) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NVBW achieves a 5.11% return, which is significantly lower than AUGT's 6.25% return.

NVBW

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 1.96%
• YTD: 5.11%
• 6M: 5.47%
• 1Y: 12.47%
• 3Y*: 9.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AUGT

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.19%
• YTD: 6.25%
• 6M: 6.91%
• 1Y: 19.22%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NVBW vs. AUGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
NVBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF	5.11%	9.25%	9.03%	0.71%
AUGT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF	6.25%	14.64%	19.69%	3.94%

Correlation

The correlation between NVBW and AUGT is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2023	0.90

The correlation between NVBW and AUGT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

NVBW vs. AUGT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NVBW	AUGT
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

NVBW vs. AUGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVBW

NVBW Risk / Return Rank: 79
NVBW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
NVBW Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
NVBW Omega Ratio Rank: 87
NVBW Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
NVBW Martin Ratio Rank: 81

AUGT

AUGT Risk / Return Rank: 81
AUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
AUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
AUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
AUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
AUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

NVBW vs. AUGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF (NVBW) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT). 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.

	NVBW	AUGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.58	-0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.72	3.70	+0.02
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.52	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	3.60	-0.49
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.81	18.69	-2.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NVBW vs. AUGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the AUGT Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVBW and AUGT, 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

	NVBW	AUGT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52	2.58	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.49	1.56	-0.07

Drawdowns

NVBW vs. AUGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVBW drawdown since its inception was -8.41%, smaller than the maximum AUGT drawdown of -13.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVBW and AUGT.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVBW	AUGT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.41%	-13.12%	+4.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.03%	-5.36%	+1.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.09%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.74%	-1.22%	+0.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.79%	1.03%	-0.24%

Volatility

NVBW vs. AUGT - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF (NVBW) has a higher volatility of 0.82% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) at 0.73%. This indicates that NVBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVBW	AUGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	0.73%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.21%	5.50%	-1.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.97%	7.50%	-2.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.93%	10.19%	-3.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.93%	10.19%	-3.26%

NVBW vs. AUGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NVBW and AUGT have an expense ratio of 0.74%.

Dividends

NVBW vs. AUGT - Dividend Comparison

Neither NVBW nor AUGT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVBW and AUGT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, NVBW and AUGT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NVBW or AUGT?

NVBW has higher volatility (0.82%) compared to AUGT (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVBW dropped -8.41% vs AUGT's -13.12%.

Which ETF is better, NVBW or AUGT?

On 1-year performance, AUGT leads with 19.22% vs 12.47% for NVBW. Both ETFs have the same 0.74% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVBW or AUGT?

Over the 1-year period, AUGT has performed better with a 19.22% return vs 12.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVBW or AUGT?

NVBW and AUGT have the same expense ratio: 0.74% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NVBW or AUGT?

NVBW and AUGT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.58 vs 2.52), 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.