DECZ vs. TMAR
DECZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (December) ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds - DECZ tracks the S&P 500 while TMAR tracks the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, DECZ returned 20.18% vs 28.83% for TMAR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DECZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.
Performance
DECZ vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DECZ achieves a 8.14% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.
DECZ
- 1D
- -0.53%
- 1M
- 4.15%
- YTD
- 8.14%
- 6M
- 8.12%
- 1Y
- 20.18%
- 3Y*
- 16.28%
- 5Y*
- 11.21%
- 10Y*
- —
TMAR
- 1D
- -0.72%
- 1M
- 2.73%
- YTD
- 14.45%
- 6M
- 15.92%
- 1Y
- 28.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DECZ vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
DECZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (December) ETF | 8.14% | 13.70% |
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March | 14.45% | 14.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between DECZ and TMAR is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025 | 0.63 |
The correlation between DECZ and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.64 - 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
DECZ vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank
DECZ
TMAR
DECZ vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (December) ETF (DECZ) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.
| DECZ | TMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.77 | -0.38 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.69 | 7.95 | -5.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.35 | 38.42 | -27.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DECZ | TMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 3.06 | -0.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 2.25 | -1.25 |
Drawdowns
DECZ vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DECZ drawdown since its inception was -16.57%, which is greater than TMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DECZ and TMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DECZ | TMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.57% | -9.93% | -6.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.53% | -3.64% | -3.89% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.24% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.57% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.53% | -0.72% | +0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.06% | -0.66% | -2.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.78% | 0.75% | +1.03% |
Volatility
DECZ vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for TrueShares Structured Outcome (December) ETF (DECZ) is 2.47%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that DECZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DECZ | TMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 4.53% | -2.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.20% | 8.17% | -0.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.57% | 9.47% | +0.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.59% | 11.42% | +1.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.39% | 11.42% | +0.97% |
DECZ vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
DECZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
DECZ vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison
DECZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, while TMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DECZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (December) ETF | 3.03% | 3.28% | 2.55% | 1.23% | 1.44% | 0.46% |
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DECZ and TMAR have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to DECZ (2.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DECZ dropped -16.57% vs TMAR's -9.93%.
On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 20.18% for DECZ. On fees, DECZ is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, DECZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 20.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DECZ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.
DECZ has the higher dividend yield at 3.03%, compared with 0.00% for TMAR.
DECZ tracks S&P 500, while TMAR tracks iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return. They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for DECZ and 0.95% for TMAR.
TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 2.12), 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.
Find the right allocation for DECZ and TMAR
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