DUBS vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

DUBS (Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - DUBS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Aptus, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, DUBS returned 32.48% vs 23.15% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DUBS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

DUBS vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF (DUBS) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with DUBS having a 13.00% return and QMAR slightly higher at 13.03%.

DUBS

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 5.12%
• YTD: 13.00%
• 6M: 13.09%
• 1Y: 32.48%
• 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*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DUBS vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DUBS Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF	13.00%	19.28%	24.08%	8.10%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.03%	10.89%	16.11%	7.87%

Correlation

The correlation between DUBS and QMAR is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2023	0.85

The correlation between DUBS and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

DUBS vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DUBS	QMAR
Technology	36.2%	54.2%
Financial Services	11.8%	0.2%
Communication Services	11.0%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.2%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	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

DUBS vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

DUBS

DUBS Risk / Return Rank: 81
DUBS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
DUBS Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
DUBS Omega Ratio Rank: 80
DUBS Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
DUBS Martin Ratio Rank: 88

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

DUBS vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF (DUBS) 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.

	DUBS	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	3.82	-1.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.47	6.00	-2.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.92	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	7.24	-3.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.74	52.23	-33.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DUBS vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DUBS Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DUBS 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DUBS	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	3.82	-1.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.53	0.91	+0.62

Drawdowns

DUBS vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DUBS drawdown since its inception was -18.48%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DUBS and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	DUBS	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.48%	-19.83%	+1.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.29%	-3.21%	-5.08%
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	-0.19%	-0.21%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.94%	-3.28%	+1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.74%	0.45%	+1.29%

Volatility

DUBS vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF (DUBS) has a higher volatility of 2.69% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that DUBS'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.

Volatility by Period

	DUBS	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.69%	1.27%	+1.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.47%	4.85%	+4.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.72%	6.08%	+6.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.54%	13.96%	+0.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.54%	13.85%	+0.69%

DUBS vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DUBS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

DUBS vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

DUBS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.93%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
DUBS Aptus Large Cap Enhanced Yield ETF	1.93%	2.06%	2.52%	1.14%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DUBS and QMAR in my portfolio?

DUBS and QMAR have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DUBS or QMAR?

DUBS has higher volatility (2.69%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DUBS dropped -18.48% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, DUBS or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, DUBS leads with 32.48% vs 23.15% for QMAR. On fees, DUBS is cheaper at 0.39% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, DUBS or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, DUBS has performed better with a 32.48% return vs 23.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DUBS or QMAR?

DUBS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

DUBS has the higher dividend yield at 1.93%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between DUBS and QMAR?

DUBS is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Aptus and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for DUBS and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.82 vs 2.57), 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.