PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BFRZ vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFRZ achieves a 1.92% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.


BFRZ

1D
0.05%
1M
3.03%
YTD
1.92%
6M
2.03%
1Y
8.65%
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)

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BFRZ and QMAR is 0.61, 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

0.61

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025

0.60

The correlation between BFRZ and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.61 - 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

BFRZ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFRZ
BFRZ Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
BFRZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BFRZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
BFRZ Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
BFRZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
BFRZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF (BFRZ) 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.


BFRZQMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.75

3.86

-2.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.38

6.05

-3.67

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.93

-0.59

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.81

7.31

-4.50

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

7.94

52.66

-44.71

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFRZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFRZ 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BFRZQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75

3.86

-2.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.85

0.91

+0.94

Drawdowns

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFRZ drawdown since its inception was -3.12%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFRZ and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BFRZQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.12%

-19.83%

+16.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.12%

-3.21%

+0.09%

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

0.00%

-0.19%

+0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.66%

-3.28%

+2.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.10%

0.45%

+0.65%

Volatility

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF (BFRZ) is 1.05%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that BFRZ 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BFRZQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.05%

1.27%

-0.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.70%

4.85%

-1.15%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.97%

6.09%

-1.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.87%

13.97%

-9.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.87%

13.85%

-8.98%

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFRZ has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

BFRZ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

BFRZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


BFRZ and QMAR have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to BFRZ (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFRZ dropped -3.12% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 8.65% for BFRZ. On fees, BFRZ is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, BFRZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 8.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BFRZ is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

BFRZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

BFRZ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for BFRZ and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 1.75), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BFRZ and QMAR

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