NDEC vs. QMAR

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

NDEC (Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - December) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - NDEC is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. NDEC is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past year, NDEC returned 16.01% vs 19.74% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NDEC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

NDEC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - December (NDEC) 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, NDEC achieves a 8.42% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 12.87% return.

NDEC

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: 0.95%
• 6M: 7.35%
• YTD: 8.42%
• 1Y: 16.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 0.79%
• 6M: 12.30%
• YTD: 12.87%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: 15.79%
• 5Y*: 11.38%
• 10Y*: —

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

NDEC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NDEC Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - December	8.42%	13.67%	0.41%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	12.87%	10.89%	0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between NDEC and QMAR is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 2, 2024	0.92

The correlation between NDEC and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NDEC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NDEC

NDEC Risk / Return Rank: 79
NDEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
NDEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
NDEC Omega Ratio Rank: 85
NDEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
NDEC Martin Ratio Rank: 79

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
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.

NDEC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - December (NDEC) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	NDEC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.99	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	4.49	-1.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.68	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	6.17	-3.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.05	34.68	-22.63

NDEC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NDEC Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NDEC 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.

Drawdowns

NDEC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NDEC drawdown since its inception was -12.98%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NDEC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NDEC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.98%	-19.83%	+6.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.19%	-3.21%	-2.98%
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	0.00%	-0.35%	+0.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.40%	-3.24%	+1.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.33%	0.57%	+0.76%

Volatility

NDEC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - December (NDEC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) have volatilities of 2.73% and 2.79%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NDEC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.73%	2.79%	-0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.70%	5.77%	+0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.69%	6.62%	+1.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.51%	14.02%	-2.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.51%	13.79%	-2.28%

NDEC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NDEC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

NDEC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither NDEC nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NDEC and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, NDEC and QMAR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, NDEC or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (2.79%) compared to NDEC (2.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NDEC dropped -12.98% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, NDEC or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 19.74% vs 16.01% for NDEC. On fees, NDEC is cheaper at 0.79% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NDEC or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 19.74% return vs 16.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NDEC or QMAR?

NDEC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

NDEC and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NDEC and QMAR?

NDEC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NDEC and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.09), 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.