LCF vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

LCF (Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - LCF is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Touchstone, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, LCF returned 17.79%/yr vs 16.76%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LCF charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

LCF vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) 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, LCF achieves a 5.23% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.16% return.

LCF

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 2.89%
• YTD: 5.23%
• 6M: 6.34%
• 1Y: 22.60%
• 3Y*: 17.79%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 13.16%
• 6M: 14.21%
• 1Y: 23.95%
• 3Y*: 16.76%
• 5Y*: 12.38%
• 10Y*: —

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

LCF vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	5.23%	17.20%	20.71%	26.20%	-5.21%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.16%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-9.78%

Correlation

The correlation between LCF and QMAR is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2022	0.85

The correlation between LCF and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

LCF vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LCF	QMAR
Technology	32.9%	54.2%
Communication Services	16.9%	15.5%
Financial Services	15.4%	0.2%
Healthcare	10.8%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	12.2%
Industrials	5.3%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	7.6%
Energy	2.0%	0.6%
Real Estate	1.5%	0.1%
Basic Materials	0.5%	1.2%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

LCF vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCF

LCF Risk / Return Rank: 50
LCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
LCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
LCF Omega Ratio Rank: 55
LCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
LCF Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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: 98

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.

LCF vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) 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.

	LCF	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	3.95	-2.04
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.67	6.18	-3.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.96	-0.61
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.96	7.61	-5.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.14	54.94	-46.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCF vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCF Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCF 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

	LCF	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.91	3.95	-2.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.89	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	0.91	+0.14

Drawdowns

LCF vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCF drawdown since its inception was -18.28%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCF and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCF	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.28%	-19.83%	+1.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.67%	-3.21%	-8.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.28%	-15.91%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.09%	-0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-3.29%	+0.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.82%	0.44%	+2.38%

Volatility

LCF vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) has a higher volatility of 2.42% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that LCF'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

	LCF	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.42%	1.27%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.01%	4.84%	+4.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.86%	6.09%	+5.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.47%	13.97%	+1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.47%	13.86%	+1.61%

LCF vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCF has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCF vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

LCF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	0.52%	0.55%	0.63%	0.71%	0.24%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCF and QMAR in my portfolio?

LCF and QMAR have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCF or QMAR?

LCF has higher volatility (2.42%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCF dropped -18.28% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, LCF or QMAR?

On 3-year performance, LCF leads with 17.79% vs 16.76% for QMAR. On fees, LCF is cheaper at 0.70% 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, LCF or QMAR?

Over the 3-year period, LCF has performed better with a 17.79% return vs 16.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCF or QMAR?

LCF is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

LCF has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between LCF and QMAR?

LCF is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Touchstone and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for LCF and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.95 vs 1.91), 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.