EJUL vs. QMAR
EJUL (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - EJUL is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. EJUL is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, EJUL returned 3.05%/yr vs 12.12%/yr for QMAR. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EJUL charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
EJUL vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EJUL achieves a 4.79% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.03% return.
EJUL
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 4.79%
- 6M
- 6.15%
- 1Y
- 17.58%
- 3Y*
- 10.38%
- 5Y*
- 3.05%
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- YTD
- 13.03%
- 6M
- 13.97%
- 1Y
- 23.15%
- 3Y*
- 16.71%
- 5Y*
- 12.12%
- 10Y*
- —
EJUL vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EJUL Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July | 4.79% | 20.20% | 4.38% | 3.50% | -10.92% | -3.47% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.03% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 12.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between EJUL and QMAR is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021 | 0.55 |
The correlation between EJUL and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
EJUL vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
EJUL
QMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
EJUL
QMAR
Financial Services
EJUL
QMAR
Consumer Cyclical
EJUL
QMAR
Industrials
EJUL
QMAR
Communication Services
EJUL
QMAR
Basic Materials
EJUL
QMAR
Energy
EJUL
QMAR
Consumer Defensive
EJUL
QMAR
Healthcare
EJUL
QMAR
Utilities
EJUL
QMAR
Real Estate
EJUL
QMAR
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
EJUL vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
EJUL
QMAR
EJUL vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July (EJUL) 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.
| EJUL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.28 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.92 | -0.40 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.64 | 7.24 | -2.60 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.22 | 52.23 | -32.01 |
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
| EJUL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.45 | 3.82 | -1.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.29 | 0.87 | -0.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.91 | -0.64 |
Drawdowns
EJUL vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EJUL drawdown since its inception was -21.61%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EJUL and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EJUL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.61% | -19.83% | -1.78% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.81% | -3.21% | -0.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.36% | -15.91% | +7.55% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.61% | -19.83% | -1.78% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.06% | -0.21% | +0.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.61% | -3.28% | -3.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.87% | 0.45% | +0.42% |
Volatility
EJUL vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July (EJUL) is 0.83%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that EJUL 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
| EJUL | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.83% | 1.27% | -0.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.73% | 4.85% | -0.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.30% | 6.08% | +1.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.66% | 13.96% | -3.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.44% | 13.85% | -2.41% |
EJUL vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
EJUL has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
EJUL vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither EJUL nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EJUL Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.64% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EJUL and QMAR have a correlation of 0.60, 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 EJUL (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EJUL dropped -21.61% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.12% vs 3.05% for EJUL. On fees, EJUL is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, EJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.12% return vs 3.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EJUL is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
EJUL and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
EJUL is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EJUL and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.82 vs 2.45), 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 EJUL 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