SPBW vs. QBSF
SPBW (AllianzIM Buffer20 Allocation ETF) and QBSF (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds from AllianzIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SPBW returned 10.30% vs 7.67% for QBSF. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SPBW charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.64%/yr for QBSF.
Performance
SPBW vs. QBSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SPBW achieves a 4.94% return, which is significantly higher than QBSF's 3.01% return.
SPBW
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- 0.65%
- 6M
- 4.29%
- YTD
- 4.94%
- 1Y
- 10.30%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBSF
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 2.66%
- YTD
- 3.01%
- 1Y
- 7.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SPBW vs. QBSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
SPBW AllianzIM Buffer20 Allocation ETF | 4.94% | 5.47% |
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF | 3.01% | 4.79% |
Correlation
The correlation between SPBW and QBSF is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025 | 0.80 |
The correlation between SPBW and QBSF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
SPBW vs. QBSF — Risk / Return Rank
SPBW
QBSF
SPBW vs. QBSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM Buffer20 Allocation ETF (SPBW) and AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF). 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.
| SPBW | QBSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 1.63 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.61 | 4.86 | -1.25 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.09 | 18.63 | +0.46 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SPBW vs. QBSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SPBW drawdown since its inception was -8.76%, which is greater than QBSF's maximum drawdown of -1.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPBW and QBSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SPBW | QBSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.76% | -1.58% | -7.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.86% | -1.58% | -1.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.22% | -0.17% | -0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.74% | -0.20% | -0.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.54% | 0.41% | +0.13% |
Volatility
SPBW vs. QBSF - Volatility Comparison
AllianzIM Buffer20 Allocation ETF (SPBW) has a higher volatility of 1.13% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) at 0.67%. This indicates that SPBW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SPBW | QBSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.13% | 0.67% | +0.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.34% | 1.91% | +1.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.13% | 2.70% | +1.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.43% | 2.68% | +4.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.43% | 2.68% | +4.75% |
SPBW vs. QBSF - Expense Ratio Comparison
SPBW has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QBSF's 0.64% expense ratio.
Dividends
SPBW vs. QBSF - Dividend Comparison
Neither SPBW nor QBSF has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
SPBW and QBSF have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SPBW has higher volatility (1.13%) compared to QBSF (0.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPBW dropped -8.76% vs QBSF's -1.58%.
On 1-year performance, SPBW leads with 10.30% vs 7.67% for QBSF. On fees, QBSF is cheaper at 0.64% per year. On volatility, QBSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SPBW has performed better with a 10.30% return vs 7.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QBSF is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for SPBW.
SPBW and QBSF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
Their fees differ too: 0.79% for SPBW and 0.64% for QBSF.
QBSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.86 vs 2.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for SPBW and QBSF
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