Skip to content

FEBT vs XTR

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETF

FEBTBCboe

Global X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETF

XTRCNYSE Arca

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

XTR −0.49pt a year

FEBT0.74%XTR0.25%

Avg volume · 30D

FEBT 14.6×the volume

FEBT24KXTR1.64K

3Y return · a year

XTR +1.4pt

FEBT+17.8%XTR+19.2%

FEBT vs XTR Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+12.2%FEBT+7.9%XTR

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. FEBT +12.2%. XTR +7.9%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−5%0%5%15%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
FEBT 0.74%
XTR 0.25%, better
Fund size
FEBT $102M
XTR $5M
1Y total return
FEBT +12.2%, better
XTR +7.9%
Yield (12M)
FEBT 0.00%
XTR 16.45%, better
Holdings
FEBT 2
XTR 506
Avg volume (30D)
FEBT 24K sh, better
XTR 1.64K sh
NAV per share
FEBT $42.54
XTR $28.54
52W range

ETF.net Grade

FEBT: Cost 68, Risk 54, Mission not scored, Tradability 63, Holdings 46, Durability 44. XTR: Cost 100, Risk 18, Mission not scored, Tradability 13, Holdings 85, Durability 46.
Pillar letters and Scores for FEBT, XTR, with each pillar’s weight
PillarFEBTXTR
Cost30% weightB68A100Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC54HigherF18
Tradability15% weightB63HigherF13
Holdings10% weightC46A85Higher
Durability5% weightC44C46Higher

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. FEBT and XTR are both graded against the same 77 S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 9-12%⁠

Category · 77 funds
See all 77 ›

FEBT ranks 16th and XTR 57th of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.

  1. Rank 14BSIXOAllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Apr/Oct ETFScore 60
  2. Rank 16BFEBTAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETFScore 59
  3. Rank 16BSTENiShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETFScore 59
  4. Rank 57CXIDEFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - DecemberScore 40
  5. Rank 57CXTRGlobal X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETFScore 40
  6. Rank 64DJULZTrueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETFScore 39

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FEBTBAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETF

XTRCGlobal X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETF

In short

FEBT Allianz Life's hedging desk, packaged as an ETF. FEBT absorbs the first 10% of its S&P 500 ETF benchmark's price decline over each February-to-January stretch, trading away gains above a cap, at a fee under the buffer-fund norm.

XTR Most downside-protection ETFs sell away your upside to pay for it. XTR pays cash instead: it owns the S&P 500 stocks and buys 10% out-of-the-money puts every quarter, leaving the upside uncapped.

Stated mandate

FEBT The Fund seeks to match the share-price return of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust over a specified one-year outcome period, subject to an upside cap and protection against the first 10% of losses.

XTR The Fund seeks to track the performance of the Cboe S&P 500 Tail Risk Index before fees and expenses.

Why people hold it

  • FEBT Charges 0.74% a year, under the buffer-fund median and below same-benchmark rival BAPR (0.79%) and laddered BUFR (0.95%).
  • The options work is run in-house by AllianzIM, the Allianz Life arm that hedges the insurer's own annuity book, rather than farmed out.allianzlife.com
  • Plain, repeatable terms: a 10% downside buffer against the S&P 500 ETF's price return, capped upside, reset for a fresh one-year period every February 1.sec.gov
  • Sits in the upper half of its buffer-ETF peer group, helped by pricing below the cohort median.
  • XTR No cap on the gains. The hedge is bought with cash rather than funded by selling calls, so index rallies come through less the put premium and fees.sec.gov
  • Costs 0.25%, well under half of what the defined-outcome funds it competes with typically charge for downside protection.
  • Owns the roughly 500 S&P 500 stocks themselves, with the put position layered on top, rather than wrapping the index in a stack of options.sec.gov
  • Rules-based and mechanical: puts are bought at 10% below the prevailing index level each quarter and held to expiration, with no manager guessing at timing.sec.gov

Worth knowing

  • FEBT Buffer and cap are set before fees (the prospectus puts the net buffer at 9.26%), and the payoff tracks share price only, so index dividends sit out.sec.gov
  • Buy mid-period and you get whatever cap and buffer remain, not the headline terms. The clean slate arrives each February 1.sec.gov
  • One of the smaller, thinner-traded funds in the buffer aisle, so the spread between bid and ask deserves a look before trading.
  • XTR Protection starts about 10% down and resets quarterly, so garden-variety dips are absorbed in full and the gap widens if the market rallies mid-quarter.sec.gov
  • Insurance is not free. The quarterly premium is a steady cost against plain index exposure, and in calm markets the puts expire worthless.sec.gov
  • A small fund that trades thinly, so limit orders matter and subscale products carry more risk of being closed than the category's giants.

Full FEBT profile⁠

Full XTR profile⁠

FEBT vs XTR Holdings

As of

How FEBT and XTR differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of FEBT and 0.0% of XTR.

Level by level

  • Holdings0 in both0.0%
  • Asset classEquity100%
  • Countryby domicile100%
  • Sector11 Sectors99.6%

Sector

Sector weights in FEBT and XTR, widest gap first
SectorMore in FEBTMore in XTR
TechnologyXTR +0.4 points
Health CareFEBT +0.2 points
IndustrialsFEBT +0.1 points
FinancialsFEBT +0.1 points
Consumer StaplesFEBT +0.1 points
Real EstateSame weight
CommunicationXTR +0.1 points
Consumer DiscretionarySame weight
EnergySame weight
UtilitiesSame weight
MaterialsSame weight

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in FEBT and XTR, widest gap first
CountryMore in FEBTMore in XTR
United StatesSame weight
SwitzerlandSame weight
ChinaSame weight
MexicoSame weight
IrelandSame weight
United KingdomSame weight

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • FEBT101.8%
  • XTR38.9%

Securities held

  • FEBT2
  • XTR505

Asset class

FEBT
Equity
XTR
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in FEBT2
  • In both0
  • Only in XTR505

Only in FEBT

2 securities, 100% of FEBT by weight

  • Spy 01/29/2027 5.12 C101.02%
  • Spy 01/29/2027 691.90 P0.76%

Only in XTR

505 securities, 99.9% of XTR by weight

  • NVIDIA Corp8.11%
  • Apple Inc7.37%
  • Microsoft Corp5.95%

Weight gaps

FEBT and XTR share no securities.

All 5 FEBT holdings⁠All 503 XTR holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

FEBT vs XTR Cost

Overpaying FEBT vs XTR

$9,148

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • FEBT 0.74%

    $14,307

  • XTR 0.25%

    $5,159

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • FEBT 0.74%
  • XTR 0.25%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530FEBT $14,307XTR $5,159

Year by year

YearFEBTXTROverpaying
10$1,319$455$864
20$5,015$1,769$3,246
30$14,307$5,159$9,148

Expense ratio

  • 0.74%FEBT
  • 0.25%XTR, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

XTR cheapest of 77 funds

FEBT 17th cheapest of 77 funds

FEBT vs XTR Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Yield (12M)
FEBT 0.00%
XTR 16.45%, better
Payout (12M)
FEBT None
XTR $4.69
Last payment
FEBT No data
XTR $0.08
Ex-dividend
FEBT No data
XTR Jun 29, 2026
Paid on
FEBT No data
XTR Jul 2, 2026
Frequency
FEBT No data
XTR Twice a year

Distribution history

Per share, 2021 to 2026, same scale for both

FEBT1 paymentAll FEBT payments⁠
One bar per payment. 1 payment from 2021 to 2026 YTD. Jan 16, 2024 $0.10. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$520232026YTD
XTRTwice a year · 10 paymentsAll XTR payments⁠
One bar per payment. 10 payments from 2021 to 2026 YTD. Dec 30, 2021 $0.64; Jun 29, 2022 $0.10; Dec 29, 2022 $0.15; Jun 29, 2023 $0.10; Dec 28, 2023 $0.19; Jun 27, 2024 $0.17; Dec 30, 2024 $5.55; Jun 27, 2025 $0.11; Dec 30, 2025 $4.61; Jun 29, 2026 $0.08. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$520232026YTD

FEBT vs XTR Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
FEBT 8.0%, betterXTR 11.7%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
FEBT 1.55, betterXTR 1.19
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
FEBT −13.2%since Feb 2023XTR −20.8%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
FEBT 0.65XTR 0.94

Popular comparisons

  • FEBTBvsZALTA

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • XTRCvsZALTA

    Global X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

    Expense ratio
    0.25% · 0.69%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FEBTBvsAUGPB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • XTRCvsAUGPB

    Global X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.25% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FEBTBvsTENJB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Feb ETF · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • XTRCvsTENJB

    Global X S&P 500 Tail Risk ETF · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.25% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.