APXM vs. MARM
APXM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April) and MARM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds from First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, APXM returned 5.49% vs 7.26% for MARM. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.
Performance
APXM vs. MARM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, APXM achieves a 2.11% return, which is significantly lower than MARM's 3.24% return.
APXM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.79%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.59%
- 1Y
- 5.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MARM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.60%
- YTD
- 3.24%
- 6M
- 3.86%
- 1Y
- 7.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
APXM vs. MARM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April | 2.11% | 5.40% |
MARM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March | 3.24% | 6.73% |
Correlation
The correlation between APXM and MARM is 0.62, 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 | 0.62 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2025 | 0.62 |
The correlation between APXM and MARM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.62 - 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
APXM vs. MARM — Risk / Return Rank
APXM
MARM
APXM vs. MARM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March (MARM). 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.
| APXM | MARM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.60 | 2.16 | +0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 20.36 | 11.63 | +8.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 110.99 | 77.52 | +33.46 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| APXM | MARM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.47 | 4.55 | +0.92 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 5.70 | 2.23 | +3.47 |
Drawdowns
APXM vs. MARM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum APXM drawdown since its inception was -0.40%, smaller than the maximum MARM drawdown of -2.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APXM and MARM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| APXM | MARM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.40% | -2.74% | +2.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.27% | -0.63% | +0.36% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.06% | -0.10% | +0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.03% | -0.20% | +0.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.05% | 0.09% | -0.04% |
Volatility
APXM vs. MARM - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March (MARM) have volatilities of 0.42% and 0.41%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| APXM | MARM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 0.41% | +0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.78% | 1.28% | -0.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.01% | 1.60% | -0.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.20% | 3.38% | -2.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.20% | 3.38% | -2.18% |
APXM vs. MARM - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both APXM and MARM have an expense ratio of 0.85%.
Dividends
APXM vs. MARM - Dividend Comparison
Neither APXM nor MARM has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
APXM and MARM have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
APXM has higher volatility (0.42%) compared to MARM (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, APXM dropped -0.40% vs MARM's -2.74%.
On 1-year performance, MARM leads with 7.26% vs 5.49% for APXM. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MARM has performed better with a 7.26% return vs 5.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
APXM and MARM have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.
APXM and MARM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.47 vs 4.55), 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.
Find the right allocation for APXM and MARM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer