QBSF vs SIXZ
AllianzIM US Equity Buffer15 ETF vs AllianzIM US Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF
Which is better, QBSF or SIXZ?
SIXZ has been ahead.
QBSF has a lower expense ratio. SIXZ led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | QBSF | SIXZ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.64%Best | 0.74% |
| AUM | $64M | $65M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 15 | 15 |
| YTD Return | +5.16% | +10.20%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.66% | +11.78%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 2.1%Best | 6.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -1.6%Best | -4.5% |
| $10,000 over 1.3 years | $11,028 | $11,516Best |
| Fund Family | AllianzIM | AllianzIM |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Option Writing | Option Writing |
| Inception | Jun 30, 2025 | Apr 30, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 1, 2025 to Oct 15, 2026 (1.3 years).
QBSF vs SIXZ growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.3 years both funds cover.
QBSF vs SIXZ Performance
AllianzIM US Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) is an ETF from AllianzIM and AllianzIM US Equity 6 Month Buffer10 May/Nov ETF (SIXZ) is an ETF from AllianzIM. Over the past year QBSF returned +7.66% while SIXZ returned +11.78%. Year to date, QBSF is up 5.16% versus a gain of 10.20% for SIXZ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SIXZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.3% compared with 2.1% for QBSF. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -1.6% for QBSF and -4.5% for SIXZ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QBSF charges 0.64% per year while SIXZ charges 0.74%. On a $10,000 position that is $64 vs $74 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QBSF currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for SIXZ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of QBSF and SIXZ you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QBSF or SIXZ?
QBSF has an expense ratio of 0.64% while SIXZ charges 0.74%. QBSF is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QBSF or SIXZ?
Over the past year QBSF returned +7.66% vs +11.78% for SIXZ, so SIXZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), QBSF annualized +7.82% vs +11.47% for SIXZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QBSF or SIXZ?
SIXZ has been the more volatile fund at 6.3% annualized versus 2.1% for QBSF. Worst drawdown: QBSF -1.6% vs SIXZ -4.5%.
Should I hold both QBSF and SIXZ?
QBSF and SIXZ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, QBSF or SIXZ?
QBSF yields 0.00% while SIXZ yields 0.00%, so SIXZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SIXZ better than QBSF?
QBSF has a lower expense ratio. SIXZ led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.