GPIQ vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GPIQ returned 37.50% vs 23.38% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GPIQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) 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, GPIQ achieves a 18.30% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.06% return.

GPIQ

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 8.51%
• YTD: 18.30%
• 6M: 17.64%
• 1Y: 37.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	18.30%	19.77%	23.22%	15.38%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	8.65%

Correlation

The correlation between GPIQ and QMAR is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 27, 2023	0.89

The correlation between GPIQ and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GPIQ	QMAR
Technology	53.8%	54.2%
Communication Services	15.8%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	7.6%
Healthcare	4.2%	4.2%
Industrials	2.9%	2.8%
Utilities	1.4%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.1%	1.2%
Energy	0.6%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

GPIQ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 81
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 82
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) 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.

	GPIQ	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	3.86	-1.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	6.05	-2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.93	-0.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.96	7.31	-3.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.48	52.66	-35.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPIQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPIQ 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

	GPIQ	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	3.86	-1.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.78	0.91	+0.88

Drawdowns

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPIQ drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPIQ and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPIQ	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-19.83%	-1.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.51%	-3.21%	-6.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.91%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.19%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-3.28%	+1.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.15%	0.45%	+1.70%

Volatility

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) has a higher volatility of 3.39% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that GPIQ'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

	GPIQ	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.39%	1.27%	+2.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.44%	4.85%	+5.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.40%	6.09%	+7.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.47%	13.97%	+3.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.47%	13.85%	+3.62%

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPIQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPIQ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.32%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	9.32%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPIQ and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, GPIQ and QMAR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, GPIQ or QMAR?

GPIQ has higher volatility (3.39%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPIQ dropped -21.06% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, GPIQ or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, GPIQ leads with 37.50% vs 23.38% for QMAR. On fees, GPIQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPIQ or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, GPIQ has performed better with a 37.50% return vs 23.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPIQ or QMAR?

GPIQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.32%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between GPIQ and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for GPIQ and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.81), 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.