OOQB vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

OOQB (Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OOQB returned -27.35% vs 23.38% for QMAR. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OOQB charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

OOQB vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF (OOQB) 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, OOQB achieves a -18.43% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

OOQB

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: -18.43%
• 6M: -24.99%
• 1Y: -27.35%
• 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)

OOQB vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
OOQB Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF	-18.43%	-13.30%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	6.90%

Correlation

The correlation between OOQB and QMAR is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 20, 2025	0.64

The correlation between OOQB and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

OOQB vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

OOQB

OOQB Risk / Return Rank: 4
OOQB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
OOQB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
OOQB Omega Ratio Rank: 4
OOQB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
OOQB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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.

OOQB vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF (OOQB) 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.

	OOQB	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.53	3.86	-4.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.50	6.05	-6.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.94	1.93	-1.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.51	7.31	-7.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.91	52.66	-53.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OOQB vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OOQB Sharpe Ratio is -0.53, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OOQB 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

	OOQB	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.53	3.86	-4.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.41	0.91	-1.32

Drawdowns

OOQB vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OOQB drawdown since its inception was -53.44%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OOQB and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	OOQB	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.44%	-19.83%	-33.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.44%	-3.21%	-50.23%
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	-43.69%	-0.19%	-43.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.26%	-3.28%	-19.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.11%	0.45%	+29.66%

Volatility

OOQB vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF (OOQB) is 0.00%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that OOQB 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

	OOQB	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.00%	1.27%	-1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.39%	4.85%	+34.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.57%	6.09%	+45.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	58.12%	13.97%	+44.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	58.12%	13.85%	+44.27%

OOQB vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

OOQB has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

OOQB vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

OOQB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.62%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
OOQB Volatility Shares One+One Nasdaq-100® and Bitcoin ETF	11.62%	9.53%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OOQB and QMAR in my portfolio?

OOQB and QMAR have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OOQB or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to OOQB (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OOQB dropped -53.44% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, OOQB or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs -27.35% for OOQB. On fees, OOQB is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, OOQB has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OOQB or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs -27.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OOQB or QMAR?

OOQB is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

OOQB has the higher dividend yield at 11.62%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between OOQB and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Volatility Shares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for OOQB and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs -0.53), 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.