NVBW vs. MSTQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NVBW (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF) and MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, NVBW returned 9.32%/yr vs 24.11%/yr for MSTQ. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NVBW charges 0.74%/yr vs 1.59%/yr for MSTQ.

Performance

NVBW vs. MSTQ - 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 LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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 MSTQ's 17.40% return.

NVBW

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

MSTQ

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 9.02%
• YTD: 17.40%
• 6M: 15.69%
• 1Y: 31.81%
• 3Y*: 24.11%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NVBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF	5.11%	9.25%	9.03%	12.70%	0.54%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	17.40%	20.57%	19.58%	43.10%	-4.89%

Correlation

The correlation between NVBW and MSTQ is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 2, 2022	0.78

The correlation between NVBW and MSTQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NVBW	MSTQ
Technology	36.2%	54.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	7.6%
Energy	3.5%	0.6%
Utilities	2.3%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.1%

Return for Risk

NVBW vs. MSTQ — 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

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 59
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 64
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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. MSTQ - 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 LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.23	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.72	2.97	+0.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.39	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	2.58	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.81	8.04	+7.77
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. MSTQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVBW Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the MSTQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVBW and MSTQ, 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	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52	2.23	+0.29
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.49	0.87	+0.61

Drawdowns

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVBW drawdown since its inception was -8.41%, smaller than the maximum MSTQ drawdown of -31.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVBW and MSTQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVBW	MSTQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.41%	-31.05%	+22.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.03%	-12.39%	+8.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.41%	-15.22%	+6.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.21%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.74%	-8.62%	+7.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.79%	3.97%	-3.18%

Volatility

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF (NVBW) is 0.82%, while LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a volatility of 4.25%. This indicates that NVBW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVBW	MSTQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	4.25%	-3.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.21%	10.58%	-6.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.97%	14.35%	-9.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.93%	18.85%	-11.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.93%	18.85%	-11.92%

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

NVBW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTQ's 1.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

NVBW vs. MSTQ - Dividend Comparison

NVBW has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.90%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	11.90%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%
NVBW Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Nov ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVBW and MSTQ in my portfolio?

NVBW and MSTQ have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NVBW or MSTQ?

MSTQ has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to NVBW (0.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVBW dropped -8.41% vs MSTQ's -31.05%.

Which ETF is better, NVBW or MSTQ?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 24.11% vs 9.32% for NVBW. On fees, NVBW is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, NVBW has been the lower-risk option at 0.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVBW or MSTQ?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 24.11% return vs 9.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVBW or MSTQ?

NVBW is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

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

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 11.90%, compared with 0.00% for NVBW.

What is the main difference between NVBW and MSTQ?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Little Harbor Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for NVBW and 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NVBW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.23), 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.