OCTM vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OCTM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - October) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - OCTM is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OCTM returned 8.16% vs 23.38% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OCTM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

OCTM vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - October (OCTM) 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, OCTM achieves a 2.71% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

OCTM

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.84%
• YTD: 2.71%
• 6M: 3.16%
• 1Y: 8.16%
• 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)

OCTM vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
OCTM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - October	2.71%	7.03%	0.33%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	2.87%

Correlation

The correlation between OCTM and QMAR is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2024	0.84

The correlation between OCTM and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

OCTM vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

OCTM

OCTM Risk / Return Rank: 93
OCTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
OCTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
OCTM Omega Ratio Rank: 95
OCTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
OCTM Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

OCTM vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - October (OCTM) 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.

	OCTM	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.38	3.86	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.34	6.05	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.74	1.93	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.99	7.31	-2.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.66	52.66	-28.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OCTM vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OCTM Sharpe Ratio is 3.38, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OCTM 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

	OCTM	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.38	3.86	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.04	0.91	+1.13

Drawdowns

OCTM vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OCTM drawdown since its inception was -3.29%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OCTM and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	OCTM	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.29%	-19.83%	+16.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.64%	-3.21%	+1.57%
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	-0.04%	-0.19%	+0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.39%	-3.28%	+2.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.33%	0.45%	-0.12%

Volatility

OCTM vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - October (OCTM) is 0.46%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that OCTM 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

	OCTM	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.46%	1.27%	-0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.82%	4.85%	-3.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43%	6.09%	-3.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.10%	13.97%	-10.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.10%	13.85%	-10.75%

OCTM vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

OCTM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

OCTM vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither OCTM nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OCTM and QMAR in my portfolio?

OCTM and QMAR have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OCTM or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to OCTM (0.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OCTM dropped -3.29% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, OCTM or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 8.16% for OCTM. On fees, OCTM is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, OCTM has been the lower-risk option at 0.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OCTM or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 8.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OCTM or QMAR?

OCTM is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between OCTM and QMAR?

OCTM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for OCTM and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 3.38), 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.