BSCQ vs. MARB
BSCQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF) and MARB (First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSCQ is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the NASDAQ BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2026 Index, while MARB is a Long-Short fund actively managed by First Trust. BSCQ is passively managed, while MARB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BSCQ returned 1.47%/yr vs 2.64%/yr for MARB. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSCQ charges 0.10%/yr vs 2.30%/yr for MARB.
Performance
BSCQ vs. MARB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSCQ achieves a 1.55% return, which is significantly higher than MARB's 1.26% return.
BSCQ
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- 1.55%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 4.41%
- 3Y*
- 5.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.47%
- 10Y*
- —
MARB
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- 1.26%
- 6M
- 1.42%
- 1Y
- 6.18%
- 3Y*
- 4.29%
- 5Y*
- 2.64%
- 10Y*
- —
BSCQ vs. MARB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 1.55% | 5.02% | 4.86% | 5.71% | -8.31% | -1.68% | 7.72% |
MARB First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF | 1.26% | 7.02% | 0.73% | 2.16% | 3.89% | 0.26% | -2.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSCQ and MARB is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2020 | 0.07 |
The correlation between BSCQ and MARB shifts across timeframes, from -0.15 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
BSCQ vs. MARB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BSCQ
MARB
Financial Services
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
-
Energy
-
Real Estate
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
Financial Services
BSCQ
MARB
Technology
BSCQ
MARB
Healthcare
BSCQ
MARB
Consumer Cyclical
BSCQ
MARB
Industrials
BSCQ
MARB
Consumer Defensive
BSCQ
MARB
-
Utilities
BSCQ
MARB
-
Energy
BSCQ
MARB
-
Real Estate
BSCQ
MARB
Communication Services
BSCQ
MARB
Basic Materials
BSCQ
MARB
-
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
BSCQ vs. MARB — Risk / Return Rank
BSCQ
MARB
BSCQ vs. MARB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) and First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB). 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.
| BSCQ | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +5.89 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +13.42 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 3.45 | 1.32 | +2.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 43.24 | 2.56 | +40.68 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 179.65 | 20.98 | +158.66 |
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
| BSCQ | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.06 | 1.17 | +5.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.45 | 0.62 | -0.17 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.60 | 0.36 | +0.24 |
Drawdowns
BSCQ vs. MARB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSCQ drawdown since its inception was -16.50%, which is greater than MARB's maximum drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSCQ and MARB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSCQ | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.50% | -11.99% | -4.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.10% | -2.43% | +2.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.13% | -3.67% | +2.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.02% | -3.67% | -9.35% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.85% | -1.40% | -1.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.02% | 0.30% | -0.28% |
Volatility
BSCQ vs. MARB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) is 0.17%, while First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB) has a volatility of 0.47%. This indicates that BSCQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MARB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSCQ | MARB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.17% | 0.47% | -0.30% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.43% | 2.18% | -1.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.63% | 5.31% | -4.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.30% | 4.27% | -0.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.77% | 5.60% | -0.83% |
BSCQ vs. MARB - Expense Ratio Comparison
BSCQ has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than MARB's 2.30% expense ratio.
Dividends
BSCQ vs. MARB - Dividend Comparison
BSCQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, more than MARB's 2.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 4.12% | 4.14% | 4.05% | 3.53% | 2.54% | 1.91% | 2.42% | 2.96% | 3.32% | 2.92% | 0.51% |
MARB First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF | 2.98% | 3.01% | 2.11% | 2.20% | 0.99% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSCQ and MARB have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MARB has higher volatility (0.47%) compared to BSCQ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSCQ dropped -16.50% vs MARB's -11.99%.
On 5-year performance, MARB leads with 2.64% vs 1.47% for BSCQ. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MARB has performed better with a 2.64% return vs 1.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BSCQ is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 2.30% for MARB.
BSCQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 2.98% for MARB.
BSCQ is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while MARB is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for BSCQ and 2.30% for MARB.
BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.06 vs 1.17), 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 BSCQ and MARB
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