ABIG vs. QMAR
ABIG (Argent Large Cap ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds — ABIG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Argent, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ABIG returned 17.00% vs 27.66% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ABIG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
ABIG vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ABIG achieves a -0.55% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 7.46% return.
ABIG
- 1D
- 0.80%
- 1M
- 5.74%
- YTD
- -0.55%
- 6M
- 1.63%
- 1Y
- 17.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- 0.47%
- 1M
- 5.60%
- YTD
- 7.46%
- 6M
- 10.33%
- 1Y
- 27.66%
- 3Y*
- 17.01%
- 5Y*
- 11.06%
- 10Y*
- —
ABIG vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ABIG Argent Large Cap ETF | -0.55% | 16.95% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 7.46% | 17.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between ABIG and QMAR is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2025 | 0.83 |
The correlation between ABIG and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 — a consistent structural relationship.
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
ABIG vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
ABIG
QMAR
ABIG vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Argent Large Cap ETF (ABIG) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). 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.
| ABIG | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.20 | 3.67 | -2.47 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.73 | 5.81 | -4.09 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 1.94 | -0.72 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.28 | 8.30 | -7.02 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.55 | 51.38 | -46.83 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ABIG | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.20 | 3.67 | -2.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.79 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.10 | 0.84 | +0.26 |
Drawdowns
ABIG vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ABIG drawdown since its inception was -13.70%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABIG and QMAR.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| ABIG | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.70% | -19.83% | +6.13% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.70% | -3.21% | -10.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.49% | 0.00% | -3.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.40% | -3.37% | +0.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.86% | 0.55% | +3.31% |
Volatility
ABIG vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Argent Large Cap ETF (ABIG) has a higher volatility of 5.78% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 3.98%. This indicates that ABIG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| ABIG | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.78% | 3.98% | +1.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.30% | 4.91% | +5.39% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.32% | 7.62% | +6.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.70% | 14.05% | +0.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.70% | 14.01% | +0.69% |
ABIG vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
ABIG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
ABIG vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
ABIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ABIG Argent Large Cap ETF | 0.10% | 0.10% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |