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

Performance

DMAX vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX) 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, DMAX achieves a 2.34% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.


DMAX

1D
-0.07%
1M
0.86%
YTD
2.34%
6M
3.01%
1Y
8.46%
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)

DMAX vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between DMAX and QMAR is 0.78, 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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025

0.79

The correlation between DMAX and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.79 - 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

DMAX vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

DMAX
DMAX Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
DMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
DMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
DMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
DMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
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.

DMAX vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX) 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.


DMAXQMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.65

3.86

-0.22

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

5.65

6.05

-0.40

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.79

1.93

-0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

6.01

7.31

-1.29

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

30.74

52.66

-21.92

DMAX vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DMAX Sharpe Ratio is 3.65, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DMAX 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


DMAXQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.65

3.86

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.14

0.91

+1.23

Drawdowns

DMAX vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DMAX drawdown since its inception was -3.37%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DMAX and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DMAXQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.37%

-19.83%

+16.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.41%

-3.21%

+1.80%

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

-0.07%

-0.19%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.38%

-3.28%

+2.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.28%

0.45%

-0.17%

Volatility

DMAX vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX) is 0.32%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that DMAX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DMAXQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.32%

1.27%

-0.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.54%

4.85%

-3.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.33%

6.09%

-3.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.40%

13.97%

-10.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.40%

13.85%

-10.45%

DMAX vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DMAX has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

DMAX vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

DMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


DMAX and QMAR have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to DMAX (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DMAX dropped -3.37% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 8.46% for DMAX. On fees, DMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, DMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. 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 8.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

DMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

DMAX is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for DMAX and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 3.65), 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 DMAX 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