QBER vs. ISWN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QBER (TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF) and ISWN (Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF) are both Options Trading funds. QBER is actively managed, while ISWN is passively managed. Over the past year, QBER returned -0.85% vs 13.27% for ISWN. At a correlation of -0.37, they often move in opposite directions. QBER charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ISWN.

Performance

QBER vs. ISWN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBER achieves a -0.96% return, which is significantly lower than ISWN's 4.28% return.

QBER

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.38%
• YTD: -0.96%
• 6M: -0.37%
• 1Y: -0.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ISWN

• 1D: -0.80%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 4.28%
• 6M: 4.94%
• 1Y: 13.27%
• 3Y*: 8.12%
• 5Y*: -0.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

QBER vs. ISWN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QBER TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF	-0.96%	0.25%	0.04%
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	4.28%	23.23%	-3.17%

Correlation

The correlation between QBER and ISWN is -0.38, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024	-0.37

Return for Risk

QBER vs. ISWN — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBER

QBER Risk / Return Rank: 6
QBER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
QBER Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
QBER Omega Ratio Rank: 6
QBER Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
QBER Martin Ratio Rank: 5

ISWN

ISWN Risk / Return Rank: 30
ISWN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Omega Ratio Rank: 30
ISWN Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
ISWN Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

QBER vs. ISWN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) and Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN). 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.

	QBER	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.23	1.09	-1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.31	1.60	-1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.96	1.20	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.36	1.38	-1.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.88	4.67	-5.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QBER vs. ISWN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBER Sharpe Ratio is -0.23, which is lower than the ISWN Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBER and ISWN, 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

	QBER	ISWN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.23	1.09	-1.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.03	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.01	-0.07

Drawdowns

QBER vs. ISWN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBER drawdown since its inception was -5.72%, smaller than the maximum ISWN drawdown of -32.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBER and ISWN.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBER	ISWN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.72%	-32.35%	+26.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.35%	-9.63%	+7.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.77%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-32.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.68%	-4.03%	-1.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.72%	-16.17%	+11.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.97%	2.85%	-1.88%

Volatility

QBER vs. ISWN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF (QBER) is 0.87%, while Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF (ISWN) has a volatility of 4.67%. This indicates that QBER experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ISWN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QBER	ISWN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.87%	4.67%	-3.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.85%	10.10%	-7.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.64%	12.20%	-8.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.40%	11.67%	-5.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.40%	11.57%	-5.17%

QBER vs. ISWN - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBER has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than ISWN's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBER vs. ISWN - Dividend Comparison

QBER's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, more than ISWN's 2.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ISWN Amplify BlackSwan ISWN ETF	2.82%	2.89%	3.27%	2.91%	2.00%	0.76%
QBER TrueShares Quarterly Bear Hedge ETF	3.29%	3.26%	1.35%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBER and ISWN in my portfolio?

QBER and ISWN have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QBER or ISWN?

ISWN has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to QBER (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBER dropped -5.72% vs ISWN's -32.35%.

Which ETF is better, QBER or ISWN?

On 1-year performance, ISWN leads with 13.27% vs -0.85% for QBER. On fees, ISWN is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, QBER has been the lower-risk option at 0.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBER or ISWN?

Over the 1-year period, ISWN has performed better with a 13.27% return vs -0.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBER or ISWN?

ISWN is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBER.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBER or ISWN?

QBER has the higher dividend yield at 3.29%, compared with 2.82% for ISWN.

What is the main difference between QBER and ISWN?

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBER and 0.49% for ISWN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ISWN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs -0.23), 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.