FFLC vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR).

FFLC and QMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FFLC is an actively managed fund by Fidelity. It was launched on Jun 2, 2020. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

FFLC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

FFLC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	-2.68%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	9.84%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	1.87%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	12.31%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLC achieves a -2.68% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 1.87% return.

FFLC

• 1D: 1.02%
• 1M: -4.35%
• YTD: -2.68%
• 6M: 0.18%
• 1Y: 19.98%
• 3Y*: 19.96%
• 5Y*: 14.63%
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 2.41%
• 1M: 0.75%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 4.47%
• 1Y: 18.84%
• 3Y*: 14.87%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

FFLC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLC has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

FFLC

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF

Return for Risk

FFLC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLC

FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 63
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 69

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 85
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

FFLC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) 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.

	FFLC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.07	1.43	-0.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.60	2.27	-0.67
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.46	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.72	2.03	-0.31
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.35	14.07	-6.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFLC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLC and QMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FFLC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.07	1.43	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87	0.75	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	0.76	+0.29

Correlation

The correlation between FFLC and QMAR is 0.75, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

FFLC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.13%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	1.13%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

FFLC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLC drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, roughly equal to the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFLC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.72%	-19.83%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.92%	-9.23%	-2.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.72%	-19.83%	+0.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.89%	-0.88%	-5.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.05%	-3.40%	+0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.79%	1.33%	+1.46%

Volatility

FFLC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) has a higher volatility of 6.15% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 3.50%. This indicates that FFLC'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

	FFLC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	3.50%	+2.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.28%	4.62%	+5.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.69%	13.25%	+5.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.94%	14.05%	+2.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.78%	14.03%	+3.75%