NOVM vs. PQAP

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

NOVM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November) and PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NOVM returned 7.30% vs 18.45% for PQAP. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NOVM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PQAP.

Performance

NOVM vs. PQAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November (NOVM) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOVM achieves a 2.95% return, which is significantly lower than PQAP's 12.04% return.

NOVM

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 0.59%
• 6M: 2.64%
• YTD: 2.95%
• 1Y: 7.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PQAP

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 0.80%
• 6M: 11.61%
• YTD: 12.04%
• 1Y: 18.45%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NOVM vs. PQAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NOVM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November	2.95%	7.58%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	12.04%	14.48%

Correlation

The correlation between NOVM and PQAP is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2025	0.84

The correlation between NOVM and PQAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NOVM vs. PQAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOVM

NOVM Risk / Return Rank: 96
NOVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
NOVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
NOVM Omega Ratio Rank: 97
NOVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
NOVM Martin Ratio Rank: 96

PQAP

PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP 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.

NOVM vs. PQAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November (NOVM) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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.

	NOVM	PQAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.47	3.65	-0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.52	5.65	-0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.78	1.85	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.93	8.62	-3.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	27.08	46.41	-19.33

NOVM vs. PQAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOVM Sharpe Ratio is 3.47, which is comparable to the PQAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOVM and PQAP, 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

NOVM vs. PQAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOVM drawdown since its inception was -3.26%, smaller than the maximum PQAP drawdown of -10.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOVM and PQAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOVM	PQAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-10.79%	+7.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.48%	-2.15%	+0.67%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.17%	+0.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.34%	-0.62%	+0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.27%	0.40%	-0.13%

Volatility

NOVM vs. PQAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November (NOVM) is 0.53%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) has a volatility of 2.47%. This indicates that NOVM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOVM	PQAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.53%	2.47%	-1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.68%	4.20%	-2.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10%	5.07%	-2.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.94%	10.91%	-7.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.94%	10.91%	-7.97%

NOVM vs. PQAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOVM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PQAP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOVM vs. PQAP - Dividend Comparison

NOVM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PQAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%.

Position	TTM	2025
NOVM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November	0.00%	0.00%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	0.02%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOVM and PQAP in my portfolio?

NOVM and PQAP have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NOVM or PQAP?

PQAP has higher volatility (2.47%) compared to NOVM (0.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOVM dropped -3.26% vs PQAP's -10.79%.

Which ETF is better, NOVM or PQAP?

On 1-year performance, PQAP leads with 18.45% vs 7.30% for NOVM. On fees, PQAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, NOVM has been the lower-risk option at 0.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOVM or PQAP?

Over the 1-year period, PQAP has performed better with a 18.45% return vs 7.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOVM or PQAP?

PQAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NOVM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NOVM or PQAP?

PQAP has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for NOVM.

What is the main difference between NOVM and PQAP?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for NOVM and 0.50% for PQAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 vs 3.47), 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.