BUFQ vs. QTEC
BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) and QTEC (First Trust NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index Fund) are both Nasdaq-100 funds - BUFQ tracks the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD while QTEC tracks the NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUFQ returned 16.99%/yr vs 32.86%/yr for QTEC. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUFQ charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.57%/yr for QTEC.
Performance
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BUFQ achieves a 9.53% return, which is significantly lower than QTEC's 44.73% return.
BUFQ
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 2.68%
- YTD
- 9.53%
- 6M
- 10.14%
- 1Y
- 21.61%
- 3Y*
- 16.99%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QTEC
- 1D
- 0.07%
- 1M
- 22.39%
- YTD
- 44.73%
- 6M
- 40.31%
- 1Y
- 67.84%
- 3Y*
- 32.86%
- 5Y*
- 17.61%
- 10Y*
- 23.00%
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF | 9.53% | 14.03% | 16.41% | 35.51% | 0.75% |
QTEC First Trust NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index Fund | 44.73% | 22.28% | 7.32% | 67.02% | -5.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between BUFQ and QTEC is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2022 | 0.88 |
The correlation between BUFQ and QTEC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BUFQ
QTEC
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
BUFQ
QTEC
Communication Services
BUFQ
QTEC
Consumer Cyclical
BUFQ
QTEC
Consumer Defensive
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Healthcare
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Industrials
BUFQ
QTEC
Utilities
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Basic Materials
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Energy
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Financial Services
BUFQ
QTEC
-
Real Estate
BUFQ
QTEC
-
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
BUFQ vs. QTEC — Risk / Return Rank
BUFQ
QTEC
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) and First Trust NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index Fund (QTEC). 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.
| BUFQ | QTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.21 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.47 | +0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.03 | 4.25 | -0.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.34 | 13.77 | +6.57 |
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
| BUFQ | QTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.62 | 2.97 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.61 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.84 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.42 | 0.60 | +0.82 |
Drawdowns
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BUFQ drawdown since its inception was -15.74%, smaller than the maximum QTEC drawdown of -58.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFQ and QTEC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BUFQ | QTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.74% | -58.86% | +43.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.39% | -16.03% | +10.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.74% | -29.00% | +13.26% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -45.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.54% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | 0.00% | -0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.31% | -9.89% | +7.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.06% | 4.94% | -3.88% |
Volatility
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) is 1.17%, while First Trust NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index Fund (QTEC) has a volatility of 7.34%. This indicates that BUFQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QTEC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BUFQ | QTEC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.17% | 7.34% | -6.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.42% | 18.26% | -11.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.31% | 22.98% | -14.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.35% | 29.19% | -15.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.35% | 27.51% | -14.16% |
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Expense Ratio Comparison
BUFQ has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than QTEC's 0.57% expense ratio.
Dividends
BUFQ vs. QTEC - Dividend Comparison
Neither BUFQ nor QTEC has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QTEC First Trust NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index Fund | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.02% | 0.14% | 0.15% | 0.02% | 0.44% | 0.68% | 0.91% | 0.80% | 1.29% | 0.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BUFQ and QTEC have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QTEC has higher volatility (7.34%) compared to BUFQ (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFQ dropped -15.74% vs QTEC's -58.86%.
On 3-year performance, QTEC leads with 32.86% vs 16.99% for BUFQ. On fees, QTEC is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, BUFQ has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QTEC has performed better with a 32.86% return vs 16.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTEC is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.
BUFQ and QTEC have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BUFQ tracks NASDAQ 100 Index - USD, while QTEC tracks NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BUFQ and 0.57% for QTEC.
QTEC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 2.62), 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 BUFQ and QTEC
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