PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FOCT vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FOCT vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOCT achieves a 5.67% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 11.31% return.


FOCT

1D
-0.04%
1M
-0.17%
YTD
5.67%
6M
5.07%
1Y
17.13%
3Y*
11.86%
5Y*
8.80%
10Y*

QMAR

1D
-0.08%
1M
-0.85%
YTD
11.31%
6M
11.15%
1Y
19.79%
3Y*
15.62%
5Y*
11.30%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FOCT vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FOCT
FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - October
5.67%14.92%9.62%17.81%-7.59%10.32%
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
11.31%10.89%16.11%35.47%-16.56%12.87%

Correlation

The correlation between FOCT and QMAR is 0.85, 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

0.85

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.80

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2021

0.85

The correlation between FOCT and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

FOCT vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FOCT
QMAR

Technology

39.0%
58.7%

Financial Services

11.1%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.6%
14.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.9%
11.4%

Healthcare

8.3%
3.7%

Industrials

7.8%
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
6.4%

Energy

3.1%
0.5%

Utilities

2.1%
1.2%

Real Estate

1.8%
0.1%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.0%

Technology

FOCT
39.0%
QMAR
58.7%

Financial Services

FOCT
11.1%
QMAR
0.2%

Communication Services

FOCT
10.6%
QMAR
14.3%

Consumer Cyclical

FOCT
9.9%
QMAR
11.4%

Healthcare

FOCT
8.3%
QMAR
3.7%

Industrials

FOCT
7.8%
QMAR
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

FOCT
4.5%
QMAR
6.4%

Energy

FOCT
3.1%
QMAR
0.5%

Utilities

FOCT
2.1%
QMAR
1.2%

Real Estate

FOCT
1.8%
QMAR
0.1%

Basic Materials

FOCT
1.7%
QMAR
1.0%

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

FOCT vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOCT
FOCT Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
FOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
FOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

FOCT vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


FOCTQMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.91

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.71

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.00

6.18

-3.19

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.53

37.11

-22.59

FOCT vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOCT 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FOCT vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOCT drawdown since its inception was -14.07%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOCT and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FOCTQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.07%

-19.83%

+5.76%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.74%

-3.21%

-2.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.06%

-15.91%

+2.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.07%

-19.83%

+5.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.14%

-1.73%

+0.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.24%

-3.26%

+1.02%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.18%

0.53%

+0.65%

Volatility

FOCT vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - October (FOCT) is 2.22%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 2.92%. This indicates that FOCT 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


FOCTQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.22%

2.92%

-0.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.18%

5.59%

+0.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.04%

6.54%

+1.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.11%

14.01%

-2.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.88%

13.83%

-2.95%

FOCT vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

FOCT vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FOCT nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FOCT and QMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMAR has higher volatility (2.92%) compared to FOCT (2.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOCT dropped -14.07% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 11.30% vs 8.80% for FOCT. On fees, FOCT is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, FOCT has been the lower-risk option at 2.22%. 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 11.30% return vs 8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

FOCT 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 FOCT and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 2.15), 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 FOCT 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