NVDO vs. QMAR
NVDO (Leverage Shares 2x Capped Accelerated NVDA Monthly ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - NVDO is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NVDO charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
NVDO vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NVDO achieves a 18.85% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.06% return.
NVDO
- 1D
- -2.46%
- 1M
- 14.15%
- YTD
- 18.85%
- 6M
- 29.58%
- 1Y
- —
- 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*
- —
NVDO vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NVDO Leverage Shares 2x Capped Accelerated NVDA Monthly ETF | 18.85% | 11.12% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 3.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between NVDO and QMAR is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2025 | 0.55 |
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
NVDO vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
NVDO
QMAR
NVDO vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2x Capped Accelerated NVDA Monthly ETF (NVDO) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NVDO | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 3.86 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.87 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.30 | 0.91 | +0.39 |
Drawdowns
NVDO vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NVDO drawdown since its inception was -16.25%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVDO and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NVDO | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.25% | -19.83% | +3.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -3.21% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.68% | -0.19% | -2.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.99% | -3.28% | -1.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.45% | — |
Volatility
NVDO vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NVDO | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.27% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.85% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.93% | 6.09% | +25.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.93% | 13.97% | +17.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.93% | 13.85% | +18.08% |
NVDO vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
NVDO has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
NVDO vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
NVDO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.02%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
NVDO Leverage Shares 2x Capped Accelerated NVDA Monthly ETF | 14.02% | 16.66% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NVDO and QMAR have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NVDO is cheaper at 0.77% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NVDO is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
NVDO has the higher dividend yield at 14.02%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.
NVDO is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for NVDO and 0.90% for QMAR.
Find the right allocation for NVDO 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