PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PFEB vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PFEB vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - February (PFEB) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFEB achieves a 5.67% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.


PFEB

1D
-0.19%
1M
2.12%
YTD
5.67%
6M
6.69%
1Y
15.76%
3Y*
12.59%
5Y*
8.78%
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)

PFEB vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
PFEB
Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - February
5.67%10.65%12.71%14.96%-2.84%6.64%
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
13.06%10.89%16.11%35.47%-16.56%12.31%

Correlation

The correlation between PFEB and QMAR is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.79

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021

0.82

The correlation between PFEB and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

PFEB vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PFEB
QMAR

Technology

36.2%
54.2%

Financial Services

11.9%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.9%
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
12.2%

Healthcare

8.4%
4.2%

Industrials

8.1%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
7.6%

Energy

3.5%
0.6%

Utilities

2.3%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Basic Materials

1.8%
1.2%

Technology

PFEB
36.2%
QMAR
54.2%

Financial Services

PFEB
11.9%
QMAR
0.2%

Communication Services

PFEB
10.9%
QMAR
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

PFEB
10.1%
QMAR
12.2%

Healthcare

PFEB
8.4%
QMAR
4.2%

Industrials

PFEB
8.1%
QMAR
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

PFEB
4.9%
QMAR
7.6%

Energy

PFEB
3.5%
QMAR
0.6%

Utilities

PFEB
2.3%
QMAR
1.4%

Real Estate

PFEB
1.9%
QMAR
0.1%

Basic Materials

PFEB
1.8%
QMAR
1.2%

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

PFEB vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFEB
PFEB Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
PFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
PFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
PFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
PFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

PFEB vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - February (PFEB) 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.


PFEBQMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.20

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.04

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.93

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.36

7.31

-3.95

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.80

52.66

-34.85

PFEB vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.66, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFEB 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PFEBQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.66

3.86

-1.20

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.07

0.87

+0.20

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.81

0.91

-0.09

Drawdowns

PFEB vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFEB drawdown since its inception was -19.98%, roughly equal to the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFEB and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PFEBQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.98%

-19.83%

-0.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.71%

-3.21%

-1.50%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.58%

-15.91%

+5.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-11.05%

-19.83%

+8.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-0.19%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.83%

-3.28%

+1.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.89%

0.45%

+0.44%

Volatility

PFEB vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - February (PFEB) is 1.04%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that PFEB 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PFEBQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.04%

1.27%

-0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.55%

4.85%

-0.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.94%

6.09%

-0.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.23%

13.97%

-5.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.32%

13.85%

-2.53%

PFEB vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFEB has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

PFEB vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PFEB nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


PFEB and QMAR have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to PFEB (1.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFEB dropped -19.98% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 8.78% for PFEB. On fees, PFEB is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PFEB has been the lower-risk option at 1.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 8.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PFEB is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

PFEB is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for PFEB and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.66), 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 PFEB 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