DCMT vs. QCJA

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DCMT (DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF) and QCJA (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January) are both exchange-traded funds - DCMT is a Commodities fund actively managed by DoubleLine, while QCJA is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, DCMT returned 22.10% vs 13.78% for QCJA. At a correlation of -0.00, they often move in opposite directions. DCMT charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QCJA.

Performance

DCMT vs. QCJA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DCMT achieves a 19.96% return, which is significantly higher than QCJA's 4.99% return.

DCMT

• 1D: -1.04%
• 1M: -11.03%
• YTD: 19.96%
• 6M: 18.79%
• 1Y: 22.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QCJA

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: -0.34%
• YTD: 4.99%
• 6M: 5.33%
• 1Y: 13.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DCMT vs. QCJA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	19.96%	1.87%
QCJA FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January	4.99%	11.05%

Correlation

The correlation between DCMT and QCJA is -0.12, 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	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 21, 2025	-0.00

The correlation between DCMT and QCJA shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to -0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

DCMT vs. QCJA — Risk / Return Rank

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

DCMT

DCMT Risk / Return Rank: 37
DCMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
DCMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
DCMT Omega Ratio Rank: 34
DCMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
DCMT Martin Ratio Rank: 47

QCJA

QCJA Risk / Return Rank: 78
QCJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QCJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QCJA Omega Ratio Rank: 85
QCJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
QCJA Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

DCMT vs. QCJA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	DCMT	QCJA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	2.33	-1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.72	3.34	-1.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.47	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.60	2.78	-1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.23	13.33	-6.09

DCMT vs. QCJA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DCMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is lower than the QCJA Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DCMT and QCJA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DCMT vs. QCJA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DCMT drawdown since its inception was -13.89%, which is greater than QCJA's maximum drawdown of -10.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCMT and QCJA.

Drawdown Indicators

	DCMT	QCJA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.89%	-10.67%	-3.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.89%	-4.98%	-8.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.89%	-0.98%	-12.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.29%	-1.17%	-2.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.10%	1.04%	+2.06%

Volatility

DCMT vs. QCJA - Volatility Comparison

DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF (DCMT) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) at 2.06%. This indicates that DCMT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QCJA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DCMT	QCJA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.62%	2.06%	+2.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.30%	4.98%	+11.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.53%	5.98%	+12.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.85%	9.44%	+6.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.85%	9.44%	+6.41%

DCMT vs. QCJA - Expense Ratio Comparison

DCMT has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than QCJA's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

DCMT vs. QCJA - Dividend Comparison

DCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, while QCJA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
DCMT DoubleLine Commodity Strategy ETF	3.06%	3.67%	1.59%
QCJA FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DCMT and QCJA in my portfolio?

DCMT and QCJA have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DCMT or QCJA?

DCMT has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to QCJA (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCMT dropped -13.89% vs QCJA's -10.67%.

Which ETF is better, DCMT or QCJA?

On 1-year performance, DCMT leads with 22.10% vs 13.78% for QCJA. On fees, DCMT is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, QCJA has been the lower-risk option at 2.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DCMT or QCJA?

Over the 1-year period, DCMT has performed better with a 22.10% return vs 13.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DCMT or QCJA?

DCMT is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DCMT or QCJA?

DCMT has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 0.00% for QCJA.

What is the main difference between DCMT and QCJA?

DCMT is categorized as Commodities, while QCJA is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: DoubleLine and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for DCMT and 0.90% for QCJA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.21), 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.