MARZ vs. QMAR
MARZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (March) ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - MARZ is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Index, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. MARZ is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, MARZ returned 10.65%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MARZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
MARZ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MARZ achieves a 7.95% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.
MARZ
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 4.18%
- YTD
- 7.95%
- 6M
- 7.73%
- 1Y
- 20.32%
- 3Y*
- 16.16%
- 5Y*
- 10.65%
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 2.81%
- YTD
- 13.06%
- 6M
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 23.38%
- 3Y*
- 16.73%
- 5Y*
- 12.13%
- 10Y*
- —
MARZ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MARZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (March) ETF | 7.95% | 12.90% | 17.90% | 20.37% | -12.70% | 15.63% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 12.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between MARZ and QMAR is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021 | 0.87 |
The correlation between MARZ and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - 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
MARZ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
MARZ
QMAR
MARZ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (March) ETF (MARZ) 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.
| MARZ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.93 | -0.55 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.74 | 7.31 | -4.57 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.85 | 52.66 | -40.81 |
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
| MARZ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.10 | 3.86 | -1.76 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.00 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | 0.91 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
MARZ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MARZ drawdown since its inception was -18.89%, roughly equal to the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARZ and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MARZ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.89% | -19.83% | +0.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.45% | -3.21% | -4.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.84% | -15.91% | +1.07% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.89% | -19.83% | +0.94% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.48% | -0.19% | -0.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.02% | -3.28% | -0.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.72% | 0.45% | +1.27% |
Volatility
MARZ vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Structured Outcome (March) ETF (MARZ) has a higher volatility of 2.33% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that MARZ'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
| MARZ | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.33% | 1.27% | +1.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.46% | 4.85% | +2.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.71% | 6.09% | +3.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.29% | 13.97% | -1.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.20% | 13.85% | -1.65% |
MARZ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MARZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
MARZ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
MARZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MARZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (March) ETF | 3.06% | 3.30% | 4.55% | 7.33% | 0.78% | 2.43% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MARZ and QMAR have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MARZ has higher volatility (2.33%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARZ dropped -18.89% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 10.65% for MARZ. On fees, MARZ is cheaper at 0.79% 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 10.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MARZ is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
MARZ has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.
MARZ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MARZ and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.10), 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 MARZ 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