FSEP vs. MSTQ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FSEP (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September) and MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) are both Options Trading funds. FSEP is passively managed, while MSTQ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FSEP returned 14.52%/yr vs 24.19%/yr for MSTQ. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSEP charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.59%/yr for MSTQ.

Performance

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) and LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSEP achieves a 6.79% return, which is significantly lower than MSTQ's 17.64% return.

FSEP

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 6.79%
• 6M: 7.39%
• 1Y: 18.45%
• 3Y*: 14.52%
• 5Y*: 10.17%
• 10Y*: —

MSTQ

• 1D: 0.46%
• 1M: 8.99%
• YTD: 17.64%
• 6M: 16.18%
• 1Y: 33.28%
• 3Y*: 24.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FSEP FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September	6.79%	12.83%	13.56%	20.23%	-1.08%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	17.64%	20.57%	19.58%	43.10%	-21.67%

Correlation

The correlation between FSEP and MSTQ 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 16, 2022	0.86

The correlation between FSEP and MSTQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSEP	MSTQ
Technology	36.2%	54.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.4%	4.2%
Industrials	8.1%	2.9%
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%	1.1%

Return for Risk

FSEP vs. MSTQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSEP

FSEP Risk / Return Rank: 76
FSEP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
FSEP Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
FSEP Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FSEP Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FSEP Martin Ratio Rank: 82

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 61
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 65
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) and LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ). 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.

	FSEP	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.46	2.33	+0.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.55	3.08	+0.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.40	+0.09
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.33	2.74	+0.59
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.83	8.57	+8.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSEP Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the MSTQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSEP and MSTQ, 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

	FSEP	MSTQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.46	2.33	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.10	0.88	+0.22

Drawdowns

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSEP drawdown since its inception was -13.79%, smaller than the maximum MSTQ drawdown of -31.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSEP and MSTQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSEP	MSTQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.79%	-31.05%	+17.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.62%	-12.39%	+6.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.37%	-15.22%	+2.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.79%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.14%	-8.63%	+6.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	3.97%	-2.86%

Volatility

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) is 1.23%, while LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a volatility of 4.25%. This indicates that FSEP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MSTQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSEP	MSTQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.23%	4.25%	-3.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.79%	10.59%	-4.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.52%	14.35%	-6.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.79%	18.86%	-8.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.54%	18.86%	-8.32%

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSEP has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than MSTQ's 1.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSEP vs. MSTQ - Dividend Comparison

FSEP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.87%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FSEP FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	11.87%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSEP and MSTQ in my portfolio?

FSEP and MSTQ 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, FSEP or MSTQ?

MSTQ has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to FSEP (1.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSEP dropped -13.79% vs MSTQ's -31.05%.

Which ETF is better, FSEP or MSTQ?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 24.19% vs 14.52% for FSEP. On fees, FSEP is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, FSEP has been the lower-risk option at 1.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FSEP or MSTQ?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 24.19% return vs 14.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSEP or MSTQ?

FSEP is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSEP or MSTQ?

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 11.87%, compared with 0.00% for FSEP.

What is the main difference between FSEP and MSTQ?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Little Harbor Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FSEP and 1.59% for MSTQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FSEP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.33), 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.