FAPR vs. LQTI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FAPR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FAPR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while LQTI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by FT Vest. FAPR is passively managed, while LQTI is actively managed. Over the past year, FAPR returned 12.66% vs 5.69% for LQTI. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FAPR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

FAPR vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (FAPR) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAPR achieves a 5.18% return, which is significantly higher than LQTI's 0.16% return.

FAPR

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 2.57%
• YTD: 5.18%
• 6M: 6.07%
• 1Y: 12.66%
• 3Y*: 13.47%
• 5Y*: 8.95%
• 10Y*: —

LQTI

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: -0.04%
• 1Y: 5.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FAPR vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FAPR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April	5.18%	5.44%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	0.16%	6.69%

Correlation

The correlation between FAPR and LQTI is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025	0.29

Return for Risk

FAPR vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAPR

FAPR Risk / Return Rank: 96
FAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
FAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
FAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 32
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 29
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

FAPR vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (FAPR) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

	FAPR	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.37	1.12	+2.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.48	1.64	+3.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.75	1.19	+0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.10	1.68	+9.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	48.99	5.15	+43.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FAPR vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAPR Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is higher than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAPR and LQTI, 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

	FAPR	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37	1.12	+2.25
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.87	0.88	-0.02

Drawdowns

FAPR vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAPR drawdown since its inception was -15.96%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAPR and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	FAPR	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.96%	-3.41%	-12.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.15%	-3.41%	+2.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.64%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.96%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.25%	-1.44%	+1.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.71%	-0.88%	-1.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.26%	1.11%	-0.85%

Volatility

FAPR vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (FAPR) is 1.43%, while FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) has a volatility of 1.65%. This indicates that FAPR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQTI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FAPR	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.43%	1.65%	-0.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.83%	4.02%	-1.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.79%	5.10%	-1.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.49%	5.97%	+4.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.43%	5.97%	+4.46%

FAPR vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAPR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FAPR vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

FAPR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LQTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.11%.

Position	TTM	2025
FAPR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	9.11%	7.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FAPR and LQTI in my portfolio?

FAPR and LQTI have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FAPR or LQTI?

LQTI has higher volatility (1.65%) compared to FAPR (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAPR dropped -15.96% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, FAPR or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, FAPR leads with 12.66% vs 5.69% for LQTI. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FAPR or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, FAPR has performed better with a 12.66% return vs 5.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FAPR or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FAPR or LQTI?

LQTI has the higher dividend yield at 9.11%, compared with 0.00% for FAPR.

What is the main difference between FAPR and LQTI?

FAPR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while LQTI is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FAPR and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.37 vs 1.12), 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.