BTR vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR).

BTR and QMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BTR is an actively managed fund by American Beacon. It was launched on Apr 17, 2023. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

BTR vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

BTR vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF	2.37%	-2.15%	14.45%	-6.65%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	2.45%	10.89%	16.11%	15.59%

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BTR having a 2.37% return and QMAR slightly higher at 2.45%.

BTR

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -4.28%
• YTD: 2.37%
• 6M: 3.49%
• 1Y: 0.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 1.34%
• YTD: 2.45%
• 6M: 4.74%
• 1Y: 19.05%
• 3Y*: 15.09%
• 5Y*: 10.57%
• 10Y*: —

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

BTR vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BTR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

BTR

Beacon Tactical Risk ETF

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

Return for Risk

BTR vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BTR

BTR Risk / Return Rank: 13
BTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
BTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
BTR Omega Ratio Rank: 12
BTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
BTR Martin Ratio Rank: 12

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 84
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

BTR vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) 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.

	BTR	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.08	1.44	-1.37
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.17	2.29	-2.11
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	1.47	-0.44
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.10	2.11	-2.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.19	14.64	-14.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BTR vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BTR Sharpe Ratio is 0.08, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BTR and QMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BTR	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.08	1.44	-1.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.77	-0.56

Correlation

The correlation between BTR and QMAR is 0.56, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

BTR vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

BTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BTR Beacon Tactical Risk ETF	1.26%	1.29%	0.87%	0.91%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

BTR vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BTR drawdown since its inception was -16.67%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTR and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BTR	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.67%	-19.83%	+3.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.66%	-9.23%	-2.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.54%	-0.32%	-5.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.83%	-3.39%	-2.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.36%	1.33%	+5.03%

Volatility

BTR vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Beacon Tactical Risk ETF (BTR) has a higher volatility of 4.02% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 3.53%. This indicates that BTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BTR	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.02%	3.53%	+0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.76%	4.65%	+3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.50%	13.26%	-0.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.01%	14.04%	-3.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.01%	14.02%	-3.01%