PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NOVM vs. QB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NOVM vs. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOVM achieves a 2.89% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.31% return.


NOVM

1D
-0.09%
1M
0.47%
6M
2.58%
YTD
2.89%
1Y
7.04%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QB

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.25%
6M
11.31%
YTD
12.31%
1Y
18.10%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NOVM vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between NOVM and QB is 0.73, 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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.73

The correlation between NOVM and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.73 - 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

NOVM vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOVM
NOVM Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
NOVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOVM Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
NOVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOVM Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

QB
QB Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.


NOVMQBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.75

1.61

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.78

5.23

-0.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

26.25

25.28

+0.97

NOVM vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOVM Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is higher than the QB Sharpe Ratio of 2.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOVM and QB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

NOVM vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOVM drawdown since its inception was -3.26%, smaller than the maximum QB drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOVM and QB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NOVMQBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.26%

-3.47%

+0.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.48%

-3.47%

+1.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

-0.32%

+0.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.34%

-0.42%

+0.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.27%

0.72%

-0.45%

Volatility

NOVM vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - November (NOVM) is 0.45%, while ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) has a volatility of 2.70%. This indicates that NOVM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NOVMQBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.45%

2.70%

-2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.68%

5.82%

-4.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.10%

7.03%

-4.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.92%

6.89%

-3.97%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.92%

6.89%

-3.97%

NOVM vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOVM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

NOVM vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

NOVM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%.


Frequently Asked Questions


NOVM and QB have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QB has higher volatility (2.70%) compared to NOVM (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOVM dropped -3.26% vs QB's -3.47%.

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.10% vs 7.04% for NOVM. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, NOVM has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.10% return vs 7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for NOVM.

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for NOVM.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for NOVM and 0.58% for QB.

NOVM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.37 vs 2.59), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for NOVM and QB

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