SIXZ vs. TMAR

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

SIXZ (AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. SIXZ is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, SIXZ returned 11.67% vs 21.36% for TMAR. Their 0.62 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. SIXZ charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF (SIXZ) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIXZ achieves a 7.67% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 11.84% return.

SIXZ

• 1D: 0.60%
• 1M: 1.19%
• 6M: 6.32%
• YTD: 7.67%
• 1Y: 11.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.32%

TMAR

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 10.68%
• YTD: 11.84%
• 1Y: 21.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.07%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
SIXZ AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF	$152.51K	$219.25K	$5.99M
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	$63.51K	$84.79K	$238.06K

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SIXZ AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF	7.67%	8.80%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	11.84%	15.97%

Correlation

The correlation between SIXZ and TMAR is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.62

The correlation between SIXZ and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

SIXZ vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SIXZ

SIXZ Risk / Return Rank: 74
SIXZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
SIXZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
SIXZ Omega Ratio Rank: 79
SIXZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
SIXZ Martin Ratio Rank: 79

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 81
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 87

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF (SIXZ) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	SIXZ	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	1.78	+0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	2.55	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.41	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.63	3.36	-0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.42	13.76	-2.33

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIXZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIXZ and TMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIXZ drawdown since its inception was -10.27%, roughly equal to the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIXZ and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SIXZ	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.27%	-9.93%	-0.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.45%	-6.39%	+1.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.28%	+3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.89%	-0.96%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.02%	1.56%	-0.54%

Volatility

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF (SIXZ) is 1.92%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 5.22%. This indicates that SIXZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SIXZ	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.92%	5.22%	-3.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.42%	11.39%	-5.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.44%	12.07%	-5.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.73%	12.73%	-5.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.73%	12.73%	-5.00%

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIXZ has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

SIXZ vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither SIXZ nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SIXZ and TMAR in my portfolio?

SIXZ and TMAR have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SIXZ or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (5.22%) compared to SIXZ (1.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIXZ dropped -10.27% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, SIXZ or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 21.36% vs 11.67% for SIXZ. On fees, SIXZ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, SIXZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SIXZ or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 21.36% return vs 11.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SIXZ or TMAR?

SIXZ is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SIXZ or TMAR?

SIXZ and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between SIXZ and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for SIXZ and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SIXZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.78), 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.