QBSF vs. NVBU
QBSF (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF) and NVBU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Nov ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds from AllianzIM. Both are actively managed. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QBSF charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for NVBU.
Performance
QBSF vs. NVBU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QBSF achieves a 2.67% return, which is significantly lower than NVBU's 5.46% return.
QBSF
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 2.67%
- 6M
- 2.84%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NVBU
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -0.94%
- YTD
- 5.46%
- 6M
- 4.97%
- 1Y
- 17.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBSF vs. NVBU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF | 2.67% | 4.79% |
NVBU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Nov ETF | 5.46% | 8.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between QBSF and NVBU 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
QBSF vs. NVBU — Risk / Return Rank
QBSF
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NVBU
QBSF vs. NVBU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Nov ETF (NVBU). 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.
| QBSF | NVBU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QBSF vs. NVBU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QBSF drawdown since its inception was -1.58%, smaller than the maximum NVBU drawdown of -11.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBSF and NVBU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QBSF | NVBU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.58% | -11.97% | +10.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -5.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -2.52% | +2.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.21% | -1.79% | +1.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.42% | — |
Volatility
QBSF vs. NVBU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QBSF | NVBU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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 | 2.67% | 9.60% | -6.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.67% | 11.20% | -8.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.67% | 11.20% | -8.53% |
QBSF vs. NVBU - Expense Ratio Comparison
QBSF has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is lower than NVBU's 0.74% expense ratio.
Dividends
QBSF vs. NVBU - Dividend Comparison
Neither QBSF nor NVBU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QBSF and NVBU 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.
QBSF and NVBU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
Their fees differ too: 0.64% for QBSF and 0.74% for NVBU.
Find the right allocation for QBSF and NVBU
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