BOCT vs. QMAR
BOCT (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF October) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - BOCT is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Return Index, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. BOCT is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BOCT returned 10.56%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
BOCT vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BOCT achieves a 7.17% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.
BOCT
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 2.95%
- YTD
- 7.17%
- 6M
- 7.69%
- 1Y
- 20.28%
- 3Y*
- 14.58%
- 5Y*
- 10.56%
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- 13.06%
- 6M
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 23.38%
- 3Y*
- 16.73%
- 5Y*
- 12.13%
- 10Y*
- —
BOCT vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BOCT Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF October | 7.17% | 14.34% | 12.36% | 21.13% | -8.14% | 11.58% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 12.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between BOCT and QMAR is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021 | 0.86 |
The correlation between BOCT and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
BOCT vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BOCT
QMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
BOCT
QMAR
Financial Services
BOCT
QMAR
Communication Services
BOCT
QMAR
Consumer Cyclical
BOCT
QMAR
Healthcare
BOCT
QMAR
Industrials
BOCT
QMAR
Consumer Defensive
BOCT
QMAR
Energy
BOCT
QMAR
Utilities
BOCT
QMAR
Real Estate
BOCT
QMAR
Basic Materials
BOCT
QMAR
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
BOCT vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
BOCT
QMAR
BOCT vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF October (BOCT) 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.
| BOCT | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 1.93 | -0.45 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.34 | 7.31 | -3.96 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.08 | 52.66 | -36.58 |
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
| BOCT | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.49 | 3.86 | -1.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.96 | 0.87 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.77 | 0.91 | -0.14 |
Drawdowns
BOCT vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BOCT drawdown since its inception was -24.54%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BOCT and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BOCT | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.54% | -19.83% | -4.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.09% | -3.21% | -2.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.61% | -15.91% | +2.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.29% | -19.83% | +5.54% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.15% | -0.19% | +0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.60% | -3.28% | +0.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.26% | 0.45% | +0.81% |
Volatility
BOCT vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF October (BOCT) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) have volatilities of 1.33% and 1.27%, 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
| BOCT | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.33% | 1.27% | +0.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.11% | 4.85% | +1.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.18% | 6.09% | +2.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.09% | 13.97% | -2.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.82% | 13.85% | -0.03% |
BOCT vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
BOCT vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither BOCT nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BOCT Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF October | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.20% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BOCT and QMAR have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BOCT has higher volatility (1.33%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BOCT dropped -24.54% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 10.56% for BOCT. On fees, BOCT is cheaper at 0.79% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 10.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BOCT is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
BOCT and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BOCT 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 BOCT and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.49), 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 BOCT 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