PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DECU vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DECU vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Dec ETF (DECU) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DECU achieves a 7.56% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.


DECU

1D
-0.61%
1M
3.88%
YTD
7.56%
6M
7.40%
1Y
18.55%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QMAR

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.81%
YTD
13.06%
6M
14.01%
1Y
23.38%
3Y*
16.73%
5Y*
12.13%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DECU vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
DECU
AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Dec ETF
7.56%11.52%-2.04%
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
13.06%10.89%-0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between DECU and QMAR is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2024

0.87

The correlation between DECU and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

DECU vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

DECU
DECU Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
DECU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DECU Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
DECU Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
DECU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
DECU Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

DECU vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Dec ETF (DECU) 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.


DECUQMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.11

3.86

-1.75

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.93

6.05

-3.12

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.93

-0.55

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.30

7.31

-4.01

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.25

52.66

-40.41

DECU vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DECU Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DECU and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DECUQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.11

3.86

-1.75

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.08

0.91

+0.18

Drawdowns

DECU vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DECU drawdown since its inception was -10.66%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DECU and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DECUQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.66%

-19.83%

+9.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.65%

-3.21%

-2.44%

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

-0.64%

-0.19%

-0.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.73%

-3.28%

+1.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.52%

0.45%

+1.07%

Volatility

DECU vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Dec ETF (DECU) has a higher volatility of 2.35% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that DECU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DECUQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.35%

1.27%

+1.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.15%

4.85%

+1.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.83%

6.09%

+2.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.58%

13.97%

-3.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.58%

13.85%

-3.27%

DECU vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

DECU vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither DECU nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


DECU and QMAR have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DECU has higher volatility (2.35%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DECU dropped -10.66% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 18.55% for DECU. On fees, DECU is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 18.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

DECU is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: AllianzIM and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for DECU and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.11), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DECU 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