XMAR vs. APRT
XMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March) and APRT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Apr ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMAR returned 11.18%/yr vs 14.50%/yr for APRT. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XMAR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for APRT.
Performance
XMAR vs. APRT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMAR achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly lower than APRT's 10.11% return.
XMAR
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 1.13%
- YTD
- 6.66%
- 6M
- 7.46%
- 1Y
- 13.17%
- 3Y*
- 11.18%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
APRT
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 2.00%
- YTD
- 10.11%
- 6M
- 11.19%
- 1Y
- 19.71%
- 3Y*
- 14.50%
- 5Y*
- 10.81%
- 10Y*
- —
XMAR vs. APRT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 6.66% | 10.30% | 10.10% | 10.30% |
APRT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Apr ETF | 10.11% | 7.99% | 15.15% | 17.13% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMAR and APRT is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2023 | 0.83 |
The correlation between XMAR and APRT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
XMAR vs. APRT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMAR
APRT
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
XMAR
APRT
Financial Services
XMAR
APRT
Communication Services
XMAR
APRT
Consumer Cyclical
XMAR
APRT
Healthcare
XMAR
APRT
Industrials
XMAR
APRT
Consumer Defensive
XMAR
APRT
Energy
XMAR
APRT
Utilities
XMAR
APRT
Real Estate
XMAR
APRT
Basic Materials
XMAR
APRT
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
XMAR vs. APRT — Risk / Return Rank
XMAR
APRT
XMAR vs. APRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Apr ETF (APRT). 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.
| XMAR | APRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 4.40 | 3.95 | +0.45 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 7.61 | 6.98 | +0.63 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.22 | 2.01 | +0.21 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.04 | 12.50 | -3.46 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 69.02 | 68.27 | +0.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XMAR | APRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.40 | 3.95 | +0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.01 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.13 | 1.11 | +1.02 |
Drawdowns
XMAR vs. APRT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMAR drawdown since its inception was -7.29%, smaller than the maximum APRT drawdown of -14.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAR and APRT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMAR | APRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.29% | -14.98% | +7.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.48% | -1.59% | +0.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.29% | -14.98% | +7.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.98% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.15% | 0.00% | -0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.30% | -2.05% | +1.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.19% | 0.29% | -0.10% |
Volatility
XMAR vs. APRT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) is 0.66%, while AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Apr ETF (APRT) has a volatility of 1.03%. This indicates that XMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than APRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMAR | APRT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.66% | 1.03% | -0.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.40% | 3.98% | -1.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01% | 5.01% | -2.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.56% | 10.78% | -5.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.56% | 10.29% | -4.73% |
XMAR vs. APRT - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than APRT's 0.74% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMAR vs. APRT - Dividend Comparison
Neither XMAR nor APRT has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APRT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Apr ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 4.67% |
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMAR and APRT have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
APRT has higher volatility (1.03%) compared to XMAR (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMAR dropped -7.29% vs APRT's -14.98%.
On 3-year performance, APRT leads with 14.50% vs 11.18% for XMAR. On fees, APRT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, APRT has performed better with a 14.50% return vs 11.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
APRT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XMAR.
XMAR and APRT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XMAR and 0.74% for APRT.
XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.40 vs 3.95), 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 XMAR and APRT
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