DDFL vs. QMAR
DDFL (Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - DDFL is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DDFL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
DDFL vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DDFL achieves a 2.83% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.03% return.
DDFL
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.67%
- YTD
- 2.83%
- 6M
- 3.63%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- YTD
- 13.03%
- 6M
- 13.97%
- 1Y
- 23.15%
- 3Y*
- 16.71%
- 5Y*
- 12.12%
- 10Y*
- —
DDFL vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DDFL Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July | 2.83% | 4.76% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.03% | 6.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between DDFL and QMAR is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2025 | 0.72 |
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
DDFL vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
DDFL
QMAR
DDFL vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July (DDFL) 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.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DDFL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 3.82 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.87 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.59 | 0.91 | +1.68 |
Drawdowns
DDFL vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DDFL drawdown since its inception was -1.63%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DDFL and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DDFL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.63% | -19.83% | +18.20% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -0.21% | +0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.19% | -3.28% | +3.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.45% | — |
Volatility
DDFL vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DDFL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.27% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.85% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.25% | 6.08% | -2.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.25% | 13.96% | -10.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.25% | 13.85% | -10.60% |
DDFL vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
DDFL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
DDFL vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither DDFL nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
DDFL and QMAR have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, DDFL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
DDFL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
DDFL and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
DDFL is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for DDFL and 0.90% for QMAR.
Find the right allocation for DDFL and QMAR
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