DDTJ vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

DDTJ (Innovator Equity Dual Directional 10 Buffer ETF - January) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - DDTJ 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. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DDTJ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Dual Directional 10 Buffer ETF - January (DDTJ) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

DDTJ

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 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)

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
DDTJ Innovator Equity Dual Directional 10 Buffer ETF - January	4.65%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	11.41%

Correlation

The correlation between DDTJ and QMAR is 0.89, 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 Jan 5, 2026	0.89

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DDTJ	QMAR
Technology	36.2%	54.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	7.6%
Energy	3.5%	0.6%
Utilities	2.3%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.2%

Return for Risk

DDTJ 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.

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Dual Directional 10 Buffer ETF - January (DDTJ) 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

	DDTJ	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	1.44	0.88	+0.55

Drawdowns

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DDTJ drawdown since its inception was -5.15%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DDTJ and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	DDTJ	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.15%	-19.83%	+14.68%
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	-0.97%	-1.70%	+0.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.83%	-3.28%	+2.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.46%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	DDTJ	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	7.99%	6.28%	+1.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.99%	13.98%	-5.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.99%	13.86%	-5.87%

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DDTJ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

DDTJ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither DDTJ nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DDTJ and QMAR in my portfolio?

DDTJ and QMAR have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, DDTJ or QMAR?

On fees, DDTJ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, DDTJ or QMAR?

DDTJ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

DDTJ and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DDTJ and QMAR?

DDTJ 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 DDTJ and 0.90% for QMAR.