MMAX vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MMAX (iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - MMAX is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by iShares, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MMAX returned 7.67% vs 23.38% for QMAR. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MMAX charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

MMAX vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) 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, MMAX achieves a 3.09% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

MMAX

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 0.60%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 6M: 3.75%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 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)

MMAX vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	3.09%	5.88%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	16.20%

Correlation

The correlation between MMAX 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	0.64

The correlation between MMAX and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MMAX vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMAX

MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 99
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

MMAX vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) 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.

	MMAX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	5.52	3.86	+1.66
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	10.56	6.05	+4.51
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.51	1.93	+0.58
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	22.49	7.31	+15.18
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	112.49	52.66	+59.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MMAX vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMAX Sharpe Ratio is 5.52, which is higher than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMAX 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

	MMAX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.52	3.86	+1.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.13	0.91	+2.22

Drawdowns

MMAX vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMAX drawdown since its inception was -1.93%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMAX and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMAX	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.93%	-19.83%	+17.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.34%	-3.21%	+2.87%
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	-0.13%	-0.19%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.10%	-3.28%	+3.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.07%	0.45%	-0.38%

Volatility

MMAX vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) is 0.36%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that MMAX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MMAX	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.36%	1.27%	-0.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.96%	4.85%	-3.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.39%	6.09%	-4.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.49%	13.97%	-11.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.49%	13.85%	-11.36%

MMAX vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMAX has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMAX vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	1.27%	1.31%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMAX and QMAR in my portfolio?

MMAX 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.

Which is riskier, MMAX or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to MMAX (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMAX dropped -1.93% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, MMAX or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 7.67% for MMAX. On fees, MMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, MMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MMAX or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 7.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MMAX or QMAR?

MMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between MMAX and QMAR?

MMAX is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MMAX and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.52 vs 3.86), 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.