FDEC vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FDEC (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - FDEC is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FDEC returned 10.58%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDEC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

FDEC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (FDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDEC achieves a 6.38% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

FDEC

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.64%
• YTD: 6.38%
• 6M: 7.86%
• 1Y: 20.01%
• 3Y*: 15.93%
• 5Y*: 10.58%
• 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)

FDEC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FDEC FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December	6.38%	14.82%	14.32%	22.76%	-9.18%	10.77%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	12.31%

Correlation

The correlation between FDEC and QMAR is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021	0.86

The correlation between FDEC and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDEC vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDEC	QMAR
Technology	36.2%	54.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	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

FDEC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDEC

FDEC Risk / Return Rank: 81
FDEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
FDEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FDEC Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FDEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
FDEC Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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: 97

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.

FDEC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (FDEC) 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.

	FDEC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	3.86	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.83	6.05	-2.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.93	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.44	7.31	-3.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.84	52.66	-34.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FDEC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDEC Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDEC 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

	FDEC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	3.86	-1.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	0.87	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.04	0.91	+0.13

Drawdowns

FDEC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDEC drawdown since its inception was -15.67%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDEC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDEC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.67%	-19.83%	+4.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.83%	-3.21%	-2.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.04%	-15.91%	+2.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.67%	-19.83%	+4.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.19%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-3.28%	+0.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	0.45%	+0.67%

Volatility

FDEC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - December (FDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) have volatilities of 1.27% and 1.27%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDEC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.27%	1.27%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.92%	4.85%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.62%	6.09%	+1.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.21%	13.97%	-2.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.01%	13.85%	-2.84%

FDEC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDEC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDEC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FDEC nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDEC and QMAR in my portfolio?

FDEC and QMAR have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDEC or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to FDEC (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDEC dropped -15.67% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, FDEC or QMAR?

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 10.58% for FDEC. On fees, FDEC is cheaper at 0.85% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDEC or QMAR?

Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 10.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDEC or QMAR?

FDEC is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

FDEC and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FDEC and QMAR?

FDEC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FDEC and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.64), 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.