ZALT ranks 1st and FEBT 16th of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.
FEBT vs ZALT
ZALT −0.05pt a year
0.74%0.69%
ZALT 5.8×the volume
24K138K
FEBT +7.2pt
+17.8%+10.6%
FEBT vs ZALT Performance
+12.2%+7.1%
- FEBT 0.74%
- ZALT 0.69%, better
- FEBT $102M
- ZALT $840M
- FEBT +12.2%, better
- ZALT +7.1%
- FEBT 0.00%
- ZALT
- FEBT 2
- ZALT 503
- FEBT 24K sh
- ZALT 138K sh, better
- FEBT $42.54
- ZALT $34.50
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FEBT | ZALT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B68 | A82Higher |
| Mission | A80 | |
| Risk | C54 | A79Higher |
| Tradability | B63 | B65Higher |
| Holdings | C46 | A90Higher |
| Durability | C44 | B61Higher |
Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
Same Category. FEBT and ZALT are both graded against the same 77 S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FEBTB
ZALTA
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.
ZALT The defined-outcome trade on a three-month clock: ZALT follows SPY up to a cap and buffers the first 10% of a decline, then resets both every quarter. Four fresh caps a year, at a fee under the shallow-buffer median.
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.
ZALT The fund seeks to follow SPY's return up to a predetermined cap while providing a 10% downside buffer over each three-month outcome period. It may be held indefinitely, with the defined outcomes resetting at the end of each period.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FEBT vs ZALT 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 ZALT Cost
Overpaying FEBT vs ZALT
$878
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FEBT 0.74%
$14,307
ZALT 0.69%
$13,429
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FEBT | ZALT | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,319 | $1,232 | $87 |
| 20 | $5,015 | $4,697 | $318 |
| 30 | $14,307 | $13,429 | $878 |
- 0.74%FEBT
- 0.69%ZALT, cheaper
- Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
- Median 0.79%
ZALT 14th cheapest of 77 funds
FEBT 17th cheapest of 77 funds
FEBT vs ZALT Dividends
- FEBT 0.00%
- ZALT
- FEBT None
- ZALT None
Distribution history
FEBT vs ZALT Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FEBT 8.0%ZALT 3.8%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- FEBT 1.55, betterZALT 1.50
- Worst fall
- FEBT −13.2%ZALT −8.2%
- Market sensitivity
- FEBT 0.65ZALT 0.29
Popular comparisons
- 0.74% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.74% · 0.53%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.53%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.74% · 0.74%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.74%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.