CAIQ vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

CAIQ (Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. CAIQ is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CAIQ charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CAIQ having a 11.17% return and QMAR slightly higher at 11.34%.

CAIQ

• 1D: -1.66%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 11.17%
• 6M: 10.46%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -1.50%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 11.34%
• 6M: 12.13%
• 1Y: 21.87%
• 3Y*: 16.08%
• 5Y*: 11.78%
• 10Y*: —

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

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CAIQ Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF	11.17%	4.03%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	11.34%	3.10%

Correlation

The correlation between CAIQ and QMAR is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025	0.85

Return for Risk

CAIQ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF (CAIQ) 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CAIQ	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	3.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.85	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.23	0.88	+1.35

Drawdowns

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAIQ drawdown since its inception was -9.06%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAIQ and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAIQ	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.06%	-19.83%	+10.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.21%	—
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	-2.10%	-1.70%	-0.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.72%	-3.28%	+1.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.46%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CAIQ	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.95%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	5.11%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.15%	6.28%	+7.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.15%	13.98%	+0.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.15%	13.86%	+0.29%

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAIQ has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAIQ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

CAIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.64%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CAIQ Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF	8.64%	1.54%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAIQ and QMAR in my portfolio?

CAIQ and QMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CAIQ or QMAR?

On fees, CAIQ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAIQ or QMAR?

CAIQ is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAIQ or QMAR?

CAIQ has the higher dividend yield at 8.64%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between CAIQ and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for CAIQ and 0.90% for QMAR.