OMAH vs. FTQI

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

OMAH (VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF) and FTQI (First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OMAH is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by VistaShares, while FTQI is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. OMAH is actively managed, while FTQI is passively managed. Over the past year, OMAH returned 13.78% vs 25.43% for FTQI. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. OMAH charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FTQI.

Performance

OMAH vs. FTQI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) and First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF (FTQI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OMAH achieves a 9.67% return, which is significantly lower than FTQI's 12.35% return.

OMAH

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 3.32%
• 6M: 10.56%
• YTD: 9.67%
• 1Y: 13.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FTQI

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 1.42%
• 6M: 11.44%
• YTD: 12.35%
• 1Y: 25.43%
• 3Y*: 16.33%
• 5Y*: 12.18%
• 10Y*: 7.99%

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

OMAH vs. FTQI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	9.67%	6.55%
FTQI First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF	12.35%	16.42%

Correlation

The correlation between OMAH and FTQI is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2025	0.43

The correlation between OMAH and FTQI shifts across timeframes, from 0.28 (1 year) to 0.43 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

OMAH vs. FTQI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OMAH	FTQI
Financial Services	37.3%	5.5%
Communication Services	19.8%	11.8%
Consumer Defensive	13.2%	6.2%
Technology	11.6%	49.4%
Energy	8.8%	2.3%
Industrials	4.9%	4.1%
Healthcare	4.4%	6.0%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	10.5%
Basic Materials	-	1.4%
Real Estate	-	1.3%
Utilities	-	1.5%

Return for Risk

OMAH vs. FTQI — Risk / Return Rank

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

OMAH

OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 72
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 61
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 75

FTQI

FTQI Risk / Return Rank: 90
FTQI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FTQI Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
FTQI Omega Ratio Rank: 89
FTQI Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FTQI Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

OMAH vs. FTQI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) and First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF (FTQI). 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.

	OMAH	FTQI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.69	2.35	-0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.38	3.26	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.44	-0.14
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.61	4.09	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.86	19.35	-8.49

OMAH vs. FTQI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OMAH Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the FTQI Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OMAH and FTQI, 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

OMAH vs. FTQI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OMAH drawdown since its inception was -11.83%, smaller than the maximum FTQI drawdown of -19.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMAH and FTQI.

Drawdown Indicators

	OMAH	FTQI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.83%	-19.42%	+7.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.00%	-6.24%	+3.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.42%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.42%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-19.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.47%	-1.21%	+0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-3.73%	+2.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.27%	1.32%	-0.05%

Volatility

OMAH vs. FTQI - Volatility Comparison

VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) and First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF (FTQI) have volatilities of 2.85% and 2.95%, 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

	OMAH	FTQI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.85%	2.95%	-0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.75%	8.82%	-3.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.20%	10.88%	-2.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.87%	14.81%	-1.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.87%	12.96%	-0.09%

OMAH vs. FTQI - Expense Ratio Comparison

OMAH has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FTQI's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

OMAH vs. FTQI - Dividend Comparison

OMAH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.87%, more than FTQI's 10.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FTQI First Trust Nasdaq BuyWrite Income ETF	10.96%	11.46%	11.66%	11.49%	9.85%	3.05%	3.27%	2.95%	3.27%	2.74%	3.02%	3.54%
OMAH VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF	14.87%	12.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OMAH and FTQI in my portfolio?

OMAH and FTQI have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OMAH or FTQI?

FTQI has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to OMAH (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMAH dropped -11.83% vs FTQI's -19.42%.

Which ETF is better, OMAH or FTQI?

On 1-year performance, FTQI leads with 25.43% vs 13.78% for OMAH. On fees, FTQI is cheaper at 0.75% 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, OMAH or FTQI?

Over the 1-year period, FTQI has performed better with a 25.43% return vs 13.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OMAH or FTQI?

FTQI is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for OMAH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OMAH or FTQI?

OMAH has the higher dividend yield at 14.87%, compared with 10.96% for FTQI.

What is the main difference between OMAH and FTQI?

OMAH is categorized as Derivative Income, while FTQI is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: VistaShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for OMAH and 0.75% for FTQI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTQI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.69), 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.