The principle limitation of all observational studies is the potential for unmeasured confounding. Various study designs may perform similarly in controlling for bias due to measured confounders while differing in their sensitivity to unmeasured confounding. Design sensitivity (Rosenbaum, 2004) quantifies the strength of an unmeasured confounder needed to nullify an observed finding. In this presentation, we explore how robust certain study designs are to various unmeasured confounding scenarios. We focus particularly on two exciting new study designs - ATM and ATO weights. We illustrate the performance in a large electronic health records based study and provide recommendations for sensitivity to unmeasured confounding analyses in ATM and ATO weighted studies, focusing primarily on the potential reduction in finite-sample bias.