APOC vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

APOC (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 6 Mo Apr/Oct) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - APOC is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, APOC returned 3.28% vs 23.38% for QMAR. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. APOC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

APOC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 6 Mo Apr/Oct (APOC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, APOC achieves a 0.04% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

APOC

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 0.04%
• 6M: 0.42%
• 1Y: 3.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.81%
• YTD: 13.06%
• 6M: 14.01%
• 1Y: 23.38%
• 3Y*: 16.73%
• 5Y*: 12.13%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

APOC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
APOC Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 6 Mo Apr/Oct	0.04%	2.90%	1.25%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	4.90%

Correlation

The correlation between APOC and QMAR is 0.53, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2024	0.66

The correlation between APOC and QMAR shifts across timeframes, from 0.53 (1 year) to 0.66 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

APOC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

APOC

APOC Risk / Return Rank: 34
APOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
APOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
APOC Omega Ratio Rank: 49
APOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
APOC Martin Ratio Rank: 30

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

APOC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 6 Mo Apr/Oct (APOC) 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.

	APOC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	3.86	-2.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.83	6.05	-4.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.93	-0.63
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.97	7.31	-6.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.24	52.66	-48.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

APOC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current APOC Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of APOC and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	APOC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.25	3.86	-2.61
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.91	-0.07

Drawdowns

APOC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum APOC drawdown since its inception was -4.17%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APOC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	APOC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.17%	-19.83%	+15.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.40%	-3.21%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.91%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.85%	-0.19%	-0.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.84%	-3.28%	+2.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.77%	0.45%	+0.32%

Volatility

APOC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 6 Mo Apr/Oct (APOC) is 0.30%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that APOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	APOC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.30%	1.27%	-0.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.39%	4.85%	-2.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63%	6.09%	-3.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.02%	13.97%	-10.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.02%	13.85%	-10.83%

APOC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

APOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

APOC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither APOC nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both APOC and QMAR in my portfolio?

APOC and QMAR have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, APOC or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to APOC (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, APOC dropped -4.17% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, APOC or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 3.28% for APOC. On fees, APOC is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, APOC has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, APOC or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 3.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, APOC or QMAR?

APOC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, APOC or QMAR?

APOC and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between APOC and QMAR?

APOC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for APOC and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 1.25), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.