HQU.TO vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HQU.TO (BetaPro NASDAQ-100 2x Daily Bull ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Over the past 5 years, HQU.TO returned 23.89%/yr vs 15.33%/yr for QMAR. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in BetaPro NASDAQ-100 2x Daily Bull ETF (HQU.TO) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

HQU.TO is traded in CAD, while QMAR is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the QMAR values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HQU.TO achieves a 41.30% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 14.49% return.

HQU.TO

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: 22.05%
• YTD: 41.30%
• 6M: 36.32%
• 1Y: 81.34%
• 3Y*: 46.99%
• 5Y*: 23.89%
• 10Y*: 33.31%

QMAR

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 4.86%
• YTD: 14.49%
• 6M: 13.57%
• 1Y: 24.97%
• 3Y*: 18.08%
• 5Y*: 15.33%
• 10Y*: —

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

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
HQU.TO BetaPro NASDAQ-100 2x Daily Bull ETF	41.30%	26.77%	40.01%	114.00%	-61.73%	50.44%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	14.49%	5.81%	26.09%	32.48%	-10.61%	13.38%

Correlation

The correlation between HQU.TO and QMAR is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021	0.69

The correlation between HQU.TO and QMAR shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.69 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HQU.TO	QMAR
Technology	52.7%	54.2%
Communication Services	15.2%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	14.3%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	7.6%
Healthcare	5.0%	4.2%
Industrials	3.5%	2.8%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.2%
Utilities	1.2%	1.4%
Energy	0.6%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.5%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.2%	0.1%

Return for Risk

HQU.TO vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

HQU.TO

HQU.TO Risk / Return Rank: 70
HQU.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
HQU.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
HQU.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 69
HQU.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
HQU.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BetaPro NASDAQ-100 2x Daily Bull ETF (HQU.TO) 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.

	HQU.TO	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.66	3.68	-1.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.15	5.42	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.77	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.27	8.90	-5.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.20	28.74	-17.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HQU.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HQU.TO 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

	HQU.TO	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.66	3.68	-1.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54	1.20	-0.67
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.06	1.17	-1.11

Drawdowns

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HQU.TO drawdown since its inception was -95.76%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -16.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HQU.TO and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	HQU.TO	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-95.76%	-16.54%	-79.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.85%	-2.82%	-23.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-43.00%	-15.97%	-27.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-64.83%	-16.54%	-48.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-64.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-55.29%	-2.93%	-52.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.54%	0.87%	+6.67%

Volatility

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

BetaPro NASDAQ-100 2x Daily Bull ETF (HQU.TO) has a higher volatility of 9.22% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.36%. This indicates that HQU.TO'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

	HQU.TO	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.22%	1.36%	+7.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.33%	5.29%	+19.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.85%	6.83%	+25.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	44.90%	12.81%	+32.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	44.87%	12.71%	+32.16%

Dividends

HQU.TO vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither HQU.TO nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HQU.TO and QMAR in my portfolio?

HQU.TO and QMAR have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

What is the main difference between HQU.TO and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust.