PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FHDG vs. MMAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FHDG vs. MMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF (FHDG) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHDG achieves a 6.70% return, which is significantly higher than MMAX's 3.09% return.


FHDG

1D
-0.19%
1M
1.94%
YTD
6.70%
6M
7.46%
1Y
15.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MMAX

1D
-0.13%
1M
0.60%
YTD
3.09%
6M
3.75%
1Y
7.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FHDG vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between FHDG and MMAX is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

0.67

The correlation between FHDG and MMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FHDG vs. MMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHDG
FHDG Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FHDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FHDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
FHDG Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FHDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FHDG Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

MMAX
MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FHDG vs. MMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF (FHDG) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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.


FHDGMMAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.55

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-6.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.65

2.51

-0.86

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.04

22.49

-18.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

22.17

112.49

-90.31

FHDG vs. MMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHDG Sharpe Ratio is 2.97, which is lower than the MMAX Sharpe Ratio of 5.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHDG and MMAX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FHDGMMAXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.97

5.52

-2.55

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.01

3.13

-2.12

Drawdowns

FHDG vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHDG drawdown since its inception was -14.01%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHDG and MMAX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FHDGMMAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.01%

-1.93%

-12.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.96%

-0.34%

-3.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-0.13%

-0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.12%

-0.10%

-1.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.72%

0.07%

+0.65%

Volatility

FHDG vs. MMAX - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF (FHDG) has a higher volatility of 0.72% compared to iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) at 0.36%. This indicates that FHDG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FHDGMMAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.72%

0.36%

+0.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.38%

0.96%

+3.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.39%

1.39%

+4.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.72%

2.49%

+9.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.72%

2.49%

+9.23%

FHDG vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHDG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than MMAX's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FHDG vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

FHDG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%.


Frequently Asked Questions


FHDG and MMAX have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FHDG has higher volatility (0.72%) compared to MMAX (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHDG dropped -14.01% vs MMAX's -1.93%.

On 1-year performance, FHDG leads with 15.96% vs 7.67% for MMAX. On fees, MMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, MMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FHDG has performed better with a 15.96% return vs 7.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FHDG.

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for FHDG.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FHDG and 0.50% for MMAX.

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.52 vs 2.97), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FHDG and MMAX

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