IAPR vs. QMAR
IAPR (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - IAPR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI EAFE, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. IAPR is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, IAPR returned 5.03%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IAPR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
IAPR vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IAPR achieves a 6.91% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.
IAPR
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- 1.90%
- YTD
- 6.91%
- 6M
- 8.28%
- 1Y
- 14.08%
- 3Y*
- 10.13%
- 5Y*
- 5.03%
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- 13.06%
- 6M
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 23.38%
- 3Y*
- 16.73%
- 5Y*
- 12.13%
- 10Y*
- —
IAPR vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IAPR Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April | 6.91% | 15.51% | 3.76% | 7.67% | -7.61% | 2.74% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 10.83% |
Correlation
The correlation between IAPR and QMAR is 0.62, 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 | 0.62 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.55 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2021 | 0.58 |
The correlation between IAPR and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.62 - 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
IAPR vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
IAPR
QMAR
IAPR vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April (IAPR) 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.
| IAPR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 1.93 | -0.51 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.51 | 7.31 | -1.79 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 21.30 | 52.66 | -31.35 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IAPR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 3.86 | -1.74 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 | 0.87 | -0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.91 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
IAPR vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IAPR drawdown since its inception was -17.73%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAPR and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IAPR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.73% | -19.83% | +2.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.56% | -3.21% | +0.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.46% | -15.91% | +6.45% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.73% | -19.83% | +2.10% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.41% | -0.19% | -0.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.88% | -3.28% | -0.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.66% | 0.45% | +0.21% |
Volatility
IAPR vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April (IAPR) has a higher volatility of 2.73% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that IAPR'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IAPR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.73% | 1.27% | +1.46% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.38% | 4.85% | +0.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.68% | 6.09% | +0.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.85% | 13.97% | -5.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.77% | 13.85% | -5.08% |
IAPR vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
IAPR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
IAPR vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither IAPR nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
IAPR and QMAR have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IAPR has higher volatility (2.73%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IAPR dropped -17.73% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 5.03% for IAPR. On fees, IAPR is cheaper at 0.85% 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.
Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 5.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IAPR is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
IAPR and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
IAPR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for IAPR and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.12), 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.
Find the right allocation for IAPR 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