USML vs. MAYT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

USML (ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN) and MAYT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 May ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - USML is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Index, while MAYT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz. USML is passively managed, while MAYT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, USML returned 16.76%/yr vs 15.23%/yr for MAYT. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. USML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for MAYT.

Performance

USML vs. MAYT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 May ETF (MAYT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, USML achieves a 4.25% return, which is significantly lower than MAYT's 5.99% return.

USML

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 4.47%
• YTD: 4.25%
• 6M: 4.48%
• 1Y: 4.31%
• 3Y*: 16.76%
• 5Y*: 8.67%
• 10Y*: —

MAYT

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 2.89%
• YTD: 5.99%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 15.31%
• 3Y*: 15.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

USML vs. MAYT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
USML ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN	4.25%	9.33%	23.97%	7.25%
MAYT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 May ETF	5.99%	11.29%	18.36%	11.98%

Correlation

The correlation between USML and MAYT is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2023	0.64

The correlation between USML and MAYT shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

USML vs. MAYT — Risk / Return Rank

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

USML

USML Risk / Return Rank: 12
USML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
USML Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
USML Omega Ratio Rank: 12
USML Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
USML Martin Ratio Rank: 13

MAYT

MAYT Risk / Return Rank: 93
MAYT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
MAYT Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
MAYT Omega Ratio Rank: 94
MAYT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
MAYT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

USML vs. MAYT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 May ETF (MAYT). 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.

	USML	MAYT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.26	3.12	-2.85
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.48	4.77	-4.29
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.70	-0.65
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	5.87	-5.53
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.03	35.55	-34.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

USML vs. MAYT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current USML Sharpe Ratio is 0.26, which is lower than the MAYT Sharpe Ratio of 3.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of USML and MAYT, 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

	USML	MAYT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26	3.12	-2.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	1.72	-1.27

Drawdowns

USML vs. MAYT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum USML drawdown since its inception was -35.34%, which is greater than MAYT's maximum drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for USML and MAYT.

Drawdown Indicators

	USML	MAYT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.34%	-11.99%	-23.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.09%	-2.64%	-10.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.14%	-11.99%	-7.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.48%	0.00%	-2.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.42%	-0.81%	-9.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	0.44%	+3.89%

Volatility

USML vs. MAYT - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS 2x Leveraged MSCI US Minimum Volatility Factor TR ETN (USML) has a higher volatility of 4.03% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 May ETF (MAYT) at 1.53%. This indicates that USML's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MAYT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	USML	MAYT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.03%	1.53%	+2.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.54%	3.77%	+7.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.33%	4.93%	+11.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.47%	9.12%	+15.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.29%	9.12%	+15.17%

USML vs. MAYT - Expense Ratio Comparison

USML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than MAYT's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

USML vs. MAYT - Dividend Comparison

Neither USML nor MAYT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both USML and MAYT in my portfolio?

USML and MAYT have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, USML or MAYT?

USML has higher volatility (4.03%) compared to MAYT (1.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, USML dropped -35.34% vs MAYT's -11.99%.

Which ETF is better, USML or MAYT?

On 3-year performance, USML leads with 16.76% vs 15.23% for MAYT. On fees, MAYT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, MAYT has been the lower-risk option at 1.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, USML or MAYT?

Over the 3-year period, USML has performed better with a 16.76% return vs 15.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, USML or MAYT?

MAYT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for USML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, USML or MAYT?

USML and MAYT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between USML and MAYT?

USML is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while MAYT is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: UBS and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for USML and 0.74% for MAYT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MAYT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 0.26), 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.